Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Nonviolence (Lectures)

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG 1.6-7 -- London, July 11, 1973:

There is two mission: not only to give protection to the devotees, but also to kill the demons. To kill the demons, that is one side. So the devotees of Kṛṣṇa should be trained up both ways: not only to give protection to the devotees, to give them encouragement, but if need be, they should be prepared to kill the demons. That is Vaiṣṇavism. It is not cowardism. It is not cowardism. When need be. Generally, a Vaiṣṇava is non-violent. Just like Arjuna. In the beginning he was non-violent, Vaiṣṇava. He said, "Kṛṣṇa, what is the use of this fighting? Let them enjoy." So by nature he was non-violent, but he was induced by Kṛṣṇa to become violent, that "Your non-violence will not help. You become violent. You kill them. I want." So if Kṛṣṇa wants we shall be prepared to become violent also. And Kṛṣṇa, that is open secret, that paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām (BG 4.8). Two business of Kṛṣṇa, two side. So those who are devotees of Kṛṣṇa, they should be trained up both ways, they should be prepared. But generally, there is no question of becoming violent, unnecessarily. As the modern politicians, unnecessarily they declare war, a Vaiṣṇava does not do so. No, unnecessarily, there is no need of war.

Lecture on BG 1.28-29 -- London, July 22, 1973:

So Arjuna was a kṣatriya, trained up by Droṇācārya how to kill. This is the... Nonviolence is not the business of the kṣatriya. That is cowardice. They are taught how to become violent. Otherwise, they cannot rule over. Formerly the judgement was given by the king, immediately finished. Not go to the court and wait for the judgement for ten years. In the meantime everything is finished. Not like that. Anything, there was regularly, the king used to sit in his assembly, and all the criminals, culprits, they were judged by the king himself. Sometimes the king had to kill personally with the sword. Even in European countries, the royal orders were trained up. Nowadays it is constitutional, democratic government. The king has no power.

Lecture on BG 1.36 -- London, July 26, 1973:

According to law, if somebody comes to attack you, or if somebody comes to kidnap your wife, these are ātatāyinaḥ. Or somebody comes to set fire in your house, especially they are called aggressors. So these aggressors are to be immediately killed. There is no question of nonviolence. You must kill immediately. There is no sin. Ātatāyinaḥ. But here, although the other party is ātatāyinaḥ, aggressor, still, Arjuna is considering whether they should be killed or not. That is the difference between devatā. In every action, they are calculating. But he is considering that "This kind of aggressor, because they are my kinsmen, they are my family men, whether this kind of aggressor should be killed or not?" It is common sense.

Lecture on BG 1.36 -- London, July 26, 1973:

So it is boastful, very proud of this body. So knowledge means "I am not this body. I am not this body." That is amānitvam. Adambhitvam. As soon as we become aware that "I am not this body," then my false pride immediately goes. Amānitvam adambhitvam ahiṁśā. Then ahiṁśā, nonviolence. Ārjavam, simplicity. There are eighteen qualifications of the demigods. So one who becomes a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa conscious, these, all these good qualities develop. So here is the proof, that Arjuna, because he is a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, he is considering, "Whether I shall kill them or not?" Ahiṁsā. It is consideration, not that it is final settlement.

Lecture on BG 2.1 -- Ahmedabad, December 7, 1972:

So we have to divert the activities for Kṛṣṇa. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Just like Arjuna. Arjuna, he, in the beginning, he denied to fight. That, our subject matter. He was crying. "No, no, I cannot fight." So apparently Arjuna was very nice gentleman that he is forgetting his claim over the kingdom, he's nonviolent, he's not willing to fight with his brothers, and he was crying so compassionate. So from materialistic point of view, he was very nice. But immediately, as we'll begin tomorrow, Kṛṣṇa says that "Why you are thinking like anārya?" Anārya. Anārya-juṣṭam. "This kind of thinking is not for āryas, Āryans.

Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973:

So Bhagavān is criticizing. Arjuna became a very good man: "Why shall I...? Oh, I cannot kill my kinsmen." From material point of view, people will very much appreciate, "Oh, here is Arjuna. He's so nice, nonviolent. He is foregoing his claim. He has given up his astra, bow and arrows. He's no, no longer fighting. He has decided not to fight with kinsmen, kill his own men." So from material point of view, Arjuna is supposed to be very, very good man. But the Supreme Person, Kṛṣṇa, what does He say? Anārya-juṣṭam: "You rascal, you are speaking like anārya." He'll say rascal later on. He posed himself to be very good man, but when he comes to the test of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He refuses to accept him as a good man. He's saying that "You are anārya." There are two kinds of men: anārya and ārya. Āryan. Āryan means advanced in knowledge. He's called Āryan. And anārya means uncivilized. So immediately He rebukes him, anārya-juṣṭam. "You are talking just like non-Āryan, uncivilized person." People are very much, nowadays, eager how to stop war. But Kṛṣṇa says... (break) ... at any case is not required. There is necessity of war. Just like He's trying to convince Arjuna. Our war means... According to Vedic civilization, that is dharma-yuddha, religious fight. When the actual need is there to fight, we must fight. Not that when there is need of fight, one becomes nonviolent.

Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973:

So how many people do understand this intelligence? And where is the teaching? Therefore one who is not devotee, he has no good qualifications. If he's still under the distresses of this material world, that is not very intelligent question. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, bahūnām janmanām ante jñānavān (BG 7.19). Jñānavān means intelligent, wise. What does he do? Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān maṁ prapadyate. He surrenders to Kṛṣṇa. This is intelligence. This is wisdom. So here also, the same thing. Kṛṣṇa has already expressed that "You must fight." But he is showing himself as very good man, nonviolent: "I shall not kill. I shall not do this. I shall not do this." So immediately Kṛṣṇa very strongly criticizing him that "You are talking just like anārya, not civilized man." Kṛṣṇa, still He has not used very strong words. He has simply mildly rebuked his doing to Arjuna that "You are not talking just like a intelligent man or advanced in civilization. You are talking like uncivilized man." Anārya-juṣṭam.

Lecture on BG 2.2-6 -- Ahmedabad, December 11, 1972:

So Arjuna belonged to the kṣatriya family. Therefore his hesitation to fight in the battlefield is not befitting the Āryans. For the royal order to become nonviolent, this is not good. The kṣatriyas, when they are fighting in the battlefield, the killing is not a sin for them. Similarly, a brāhmaṇa, when he's offering sacrifice, sometimes animals are sacrificed; so that does not mean that he is committing sin. This animal sacrifice was made not for eating the animals. It was for testing the Vedic mantra. Whether the brāhmaṇas who were engaged in offering sacrifice, whether they were chanting the Vedic mantra in right way, that was tested by offering one animal and again giving the animal a new youth life. That was animal sacrifice. Sometimes horses, sometimes cows were offered. But in this age, Kali-yuga, they are forbidden because there is no such yājñika-brāhmaṇa. All kinds of sacrifices are forbidden in this age.

Lecture on BG 2.2-6 -- Ahmedabad, December 11, 1972:

Parantapa means one who can give trouble to the enemies. It is the duty of the kṣatriya. Enemies, aggressor, they should be killed. There is no ātatāyī. Ātatāyī means one who is aggressor. One who kidnaps one's wife, one who take away by force one's wealth, one who sets fire in one's house, these are called aggressor. So aggressor should be killed. Aggressor should be given trouble. So Kṛṣṇa does not teach unnecessarily nonviolence. If kṣatriya becomes nonviolent, then the whole state will be in chaos. They must learn how to kill any criminal. He should be immediately killed.

Lecture on BG 2.3 -- London, August 4, 1973:

So just see how Kṛṣṇa is inducing Arjuna to fight. People are very much ignorant and they sometimes criticize that "Kṛṣṇa is exciting Arjuna. He is very gentleman, nonviolent, and Kṛṣṇa is exciting him to fight." This is called jaḍa-darśana. Jaḍa-darśana. Jaḍa-darśana means material vision. Therefore śāstra says, ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ (CC Madhya 17.136). Śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi. We become in touch with Kṛṣṇa by chanting His name, Hare Kṛṣṇa. That is the beginning of our connection with Kṛṣṇa. Nāmādi. So śāstra says, ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi. Ādi means beginning.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- Hyderabad, November 17, 1972:

So there must be violence. So expecting that there will be violence, the kṣatriya class required. Just like in the state, expecting that there will be violence, therefore the police department is maintained, the military department is maintained. So you cannot avoid violence from this material world. It is useless proposal. Our Mahatma Gandhi tried to stop violence. He started the nonviolence movement, but factually he had to die by violence. So kṣatriya, they are trained up violent to become violent to stop violence. That is required. Therefore Kṛṣṇa advises that "Don't try to become nonviolent because..." Tasmād yudhyasva bhārata. "Don't think that by killing the body, your grandfather, or your nephews and your brother on the other side, they will be finished.

Lecture on BG 2.13 -- New York, March 11, 1966:

So here is the thing, you see, that Kṛṣṇa does not say that "You become a nonviolent." No. Never says that. When there is question of fighting for right cause, you must fight. There is no question of becoming nonviolent. You see? Now, now, he is saying that "Don't be aggrieved. Even your grandfather, Bhīṣmadeva, even your Droṇācārya..., it will be good for them because they are now old enough, and as soon as they are dead, they get a new body. So you should not be discouraged." Then one is that "Do you mean to say that therefore a man should be killed?" No. We cannot kill without reason.

Lecture on BG 2.20-25 -- Seattle, October 14, 1968:

This is the distinction between violence and nonviolence. People are very much advocate of nonviolence, but they are committing, according to their estimation, they are committing every moment violence. But from higher standard there is practically no violence and the things which apparently appear to be violence, if it is properly executed... Just like under the order of high-court judge, one body is being executed. So that is not violence. A justice of higher order is not meant for committing violence. It is justice. Similarly, when, under the direction of the supreme justice, Kṛṣṇa, anything is done, apparently, although it appears violence, it is not violence. It is justice. This is to be understood.

Lecture on BG 2.27-38 -- Los Angeles, December 11, 1968:

So Kṛṣṇa conscious person is neither interested in pious activities or impious activities, but one who is in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, all activities are pious, transcendental, automatically. He hasn't got to try separately. Yasyāsti bhaktir bhagavaty akiñcanā (SB 5.18.12). Anyone. Take for example nonviolence. Nonviolence is good quality. Now here, you see Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna. Arjuna is a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Automatically he's trying to be nonviolent. "Why should I fight?" This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Because he is devotee of Kṛṣṇa, nonviolence is already his quality. People are starting vegetarian society to become vegetarian, a very uplifted society. But the persons who are in Kṛṣṇa conscious, they are already vegetarian. That means the people in the ordinary status, they are trying to acquire some good qualities, but in Kṛṣṇa conscious person you will find all the good qualities automatically. That is the difference. So Kṛṣṇa consciousness, Kṛṣṇa conscious person is not interested that this is good work or this is bad work. He is interested with Kṛṣṇa. Because his activities in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is all transcendental, better than good, śuddha-sattva, pure goodness. In the material world, the goodness, the quality of goodness is sometimes tinged with passion and ignorance. But in pure goodness, which is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, there is no tinge of passion or ignorance. Automatically everything is good.

Lecture on BG 2.27-38 -- Los Angeles, December 11, 1968:

Arjuna was reputed as a great warrior. So he should remain a great warrior. A warrior's business is not to stop fighting on the plea of becoming kind. If you have gone to the warfield and if you practice nonviolence there, this is useless. Why should you go? There is a Bengali proverb that naste bose guṇṭhanam(?), that... In India, the girls, they cover their head. That is the system of married girl's shyness. So it is said that one girl is on the stage for dancing. Now while she is to dance, she's covering the head. What is the use of covering the head? You have come to dance, you dance. Similarly, in the warfield, you have gone there to fight. Where is the question of becoming nonviolent? So things should be done according to the time and atmosphere. In the warfield, there is no question of nonviolence. The war is arranged for committing violence. Where is the question of preaching there nonviolence?

Lecture on BG 2.31 -- London, September 1, 1973:

So kṣatriya cannot be nonviolent. It is not possible. Violence is also required to keep the social system strictly in order. Just like the government has violence department, the police department, the military department. That is required to keep up the society in order. So here Kṛṣṇa says that "You are kṣatriya; your duty is to fight." Dharmyāddhi yuddhāt. "This fight arranged by Me in the battlefield of Kurukṣetra, because it is sanctioned by Me, it is dharma-yuddha, it is religious fighting." It is not the political diplomats declaring war to keep the people in ignorance. No. It is sanctioned by Kṛṣṇa. Whatever is sanctioned by Kṛṣṇa, that is dharma. Dharma, the explanation of dharma I have several times given you. Dharmaṁ hi sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam: Whatever God sanctions, that is dharma. So God, Kṛṣṇa personally has sanctioned this Battle of Kurukṣetra. So therefore it is dharma, dharma-yuddha religious fight. It is not ordinary fighting of the diplomats and the politicians. It is dharma-yuddha. Therefore He says, dharmyāddhi yuddhāc chreyo 'nyat kṣatriyasya na vidyate: "You are kṣatriya. You are fighting for the sake of religious system. That is the, your first-class duty." Śreyaḥ.

Lecture on BG 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973:

So it has to be judged, when... Sometimes fighting is pāpam, means sinful activity, and sometimes fighting is puṇyam, pious activities. It requires the time, circumstances, on what ground the fighting was going on, on whose order the fighting was going on. These are to be studied. So violence and nonviolence. Our great leader, Mahatma Gandhi, he wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gītā, nonviolence. He started the nonviolence movement, and he wanted to support... Everyone takes advantage of Bhagavad-gītā and tries to support his view on the strength of Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore you will find so many interpretations. Everyone wants to utilize. There are more than six hundred publication, commentaries, on Bhagavad-gītā. One Dr. Rele in Bombay, he has interpreted Bhagavad-gītā as talks between a physician and a patient.

Lecture on BG 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973:

It must be studied through the paramparā system, ācārya upāsanam. One must worship the ācārya and learn from him what is Bhagavad-gītā. Ācāryavān puruṣo veda. This is the Vedic injunction. Who knows things as they are. Ācāryaṁ māṁ puruṣa, one who is under the guidance of ācārya. So you won't find this foolish nonviolence theory from any ācārya. Many ācāryas have commented on Bhagavad-gītā. There is Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, even Śaṅkarācārya. But never said that Bhagavad-gītā is proof of nonviolence. Nonviolence is good but when there is dharma-yuddha, righteous fighting, there is no question of nonviolence. Violence is approved.

Lecture on BG 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973:

The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, who is worshiped by Lord Brahmā, govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **, He has agreed to drive the chariot of Arjuna on account of friendship. Now, we have to imagine how much famous he is. "Everyone will say, 'Oh, Kṛṣṇa is his so intimate friend that He has agreed to drive his chariot!' This is your reputation all over the world." So sambhāvitasya cākīrtiḥ. "And if you don't fight now, what people will say? Better you die." Kṛṣṇa is advising that "Instead of becoming a very good man, nonviolent, you lay down your life. That is My advice. You die. I shall see that you have died. I will be very much pleased." This is Kṛṣṇa's advice. How much He has become, I mean to say, dissatisfied with the decision of Arjuna, "Kṛṣṇa, I am not going to fight this battle." So Kṛṣṇa's last advice is that if you don't fight, better you die before him. I shall be very much pleased."

Lecture on BG 2.36-37 -- London, September 4, 1973:

If you are in fight, you become sympathetic, then the same example: the dancing girl, when on the stage, if she is shy, it is like that. Why she should be shy? She must dance freely. That will be credit. So in the warfield, you cannot be compassionate. That is not required. In so many ways. Ahiṁsā ārjava, these are good qualities. In the thirteen chapter, Kṛṣṇa has described ahiṁsā, nonviolence. Nonviolence is generally accepted. And actually Arjuna was nonviolent. He was not a coward, not that because he was coward, therefore he was refusing to fight. No. As a Vaiṣṇava, naturally he is nonviolent. He does not like to kill anyone, and especially his own family men. He was taking a little compassion. Not that he was a coward.

Lecture on BG 2.36-37 -- London, September 4, 1973:

They should remain always nonviolent. Even there is required violence, a brāhmaṇa will not kill personally. He will bring the matter to the kṣatriya, royal order. Just like Viśvāmitra. Viśvāmitra was being disturbed by some demons in the forest. They used to live in the forest. So Viśvāmitra was able to kill such demon, many demons, by his will. But he did not do so. He went to Mahārāja Daśaratha, father of Lord Rāmacandra, to request him that "Give your sons Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa. I will take them with me. They will kill that demon." The killing is there, but the brāhmaṇa is not going to kill personally.

Lecture on BG 2.46-62 -- Los Angeles, December 16, 1968:

Just like Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we are... Take practical example. We are Kṛṣṇa conscious. Now take any religion and take their highest conclusion—it is there in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Take for example Buddhism. They say nonviolence. Oh, we are nonviolent. Christianism, love of God. Oh, we are simply meant for loving God. Mohammedan, servant of God, to render service to the Lord. Oh, we are twenty-four hours engaged in the service of the Lord. Yogis—samādhi, always in samādhi, absorbed in the thought of the Supreme. We are always absorbed in the thought of Kṛṣṇa. So take any religion, any process, any well. This river, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, will overflood everyone.

Lecture on BG 2.51-55 -- New York, April 12, 1966:

Not to speak of others... I may tell you frankly that even in our country, the greatest, I mean to, saintly politician, Mahatma Gandhi, he propounded a philosophy of nonviolence. Perhaps you know, every one of you, that he propounded nonviolence, and he wanted to prove nonviolence from Bhagavad-gītā. He has got an annotation of Bhagavad-gītā, and he has tried to prove that Bhagavad-gītā, there is proof, nonviolence. But actually, Bhagavad-gītā is being spoken in the battlefield, where everyone is prepared to start violence. Simply for a moment, when Arjuna was disturbed in his mind, that "How can I fight with my relatives and friends and sons and grandsons and so, so many things?" Bodily relations. And the Bhagavad-gītā was spoken. So that is a practical thing that Bhagavad-gītā was practically spoken to induce Arjuna to adopt violence. Now, Mahatma Gandhi, his philosophy was nonviolence. How could he prove that Bhagavad-gītā gives evidence of nonviolence? No. Therefore, anyone, Mahatma Gandhi or anyone, who has got his own ulterior motive, to prove it from the topics of Bhagavad-gītā, he must adulterate it.

Lecture on BG 2.55-58 -- New York, April 15, 1966:

Now, just, just take the same example of Arjuna. Now, Arjuna says that "I'll not fight. I'll not fight with my relatives and brothers for the sake of achieving some kingdom. No, no, no." Now, for the ordinary man it appears to be: "Oh, Arjuna is very nice man, nonviolent. He's giving up everything for the sake of his relatives. Oh, what a nice man he is." This is ordinary calculation. But what Kṛṣṇa says? "You are fool, damn fool number one." You see? And that we have already discussed. Aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase: (BG 2.11) "My dear Arjuna, you are talking like very learned man, but you are number fool one." Yes. This is the, I mean to say, reward given. "You are, you are declining to fight? This is your nonsensical." Now, just see. The things which are estimated in the public eyes very nice, very good, that is condemned by God. Condemned by God. We have got so many examples and experiences life that what is eulogized by some of our friends, it is condemned by others.

Lecture on BG 2.55-58 -- New York, April 15, 1966:

You see? God is present. You see? And Hanumān. Hanumān, for the sake of pleasing the Lord, he set fire to the empire of Rāvaṇa, to the empire of the Rāvaṇa. And here also you find that Arjuna, he fought for the sake of the Supreme Lord Kṛṣṇa. So fighting, fighting is not bad, provided it is fought for the, for pleasing the Supreme Lord. And fighting is also necessary sometimes. So we cannot make the world nonviolent. Everything will remain. In the laws of nature, everything will remain. The sex life will remain. The fighting will remain. And whatever we are seeing in our experience, everything will remain, will continue to remain. You cannot abolish a drop of it. But the whole process is that we have to purify, purify it.

Lecture on BG 2.58-59 -- New York, April 27, 1966:

Just like Lord Buddha's teaching. Lord Buddha's teachings is... That is also detachment from matter, nirvāṇa. Nirvāṇa. But he does not speak anything about the spirit soul. Because the position in which he was speaking, that position, for the human, humanity, was not suitable for understanding what is the constitution of spirit, therefore he did not say anything about spirit. He simply preached nonviolence. So far our body is concerned, he stressed on the point that we should be nonviolent. We should not be killing animals anymore. That was his preaching. Similarly, Śaṅkara... A little more than Buddha. He said, "No, no. Matter is not all. The spirit is real thing. Matter is false." Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. Now, he did not say about the activities of spiritual life. He simply gave hint that there, that matter is false.

Lecture on BG 2.58-59 -- New York, April 27, 1966:

When you fight, you require to engage your senses. He said that "I will not fight." That means he is controlling his senses from fighting. But after hearing Bhagavad-gītā, he says, "Yes, I'll fight." Just see. Before hearing Bhagavad-gītā, the position of Arjuna, that "I," "I will not fight," and after hearing Bhagavad-gītā, the position of "I," "Yes, I will fight." Two contradictory. Before hearing Bhagavad-gītā, the position of "I" was negative, and people may estimate this nonviolence attitude of Arjuna very nicely. But after Bhagavad-gītā, after hearing Bhagavad-gītā, he said, "Yes." Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava: (BG 18.73) "Yes, I shall fight." Now, do you mean to tell that he degraded? First of all he was nonviolent. He was not willing to fight. Now he has degraded after hearing Bhagavad-gītā? Is it..., is the conclusion? No. He has improved. He has improved. Why he has improved? Because he has understood how to use the senses. That's all. In the beginning he did not know how to use the senses. Therefore he decided, "I shall not fight. I shall not fight." That is his material calculation.

Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966:

Why He was taking part in the battlefield? He had nothing to gain out of it personally, but why He was taking part in the battlefield? Just for the right cause. So He wanted to establish that for right cause there must be fighting. You cannot abolish violence from the world. This is the instruction of Kṛṣṇa in Bhagavad-gītā. If required, violence will be taken. And Kṛṣṇa induced Arjuna to be violent. Arjuna wanted to be nonviolent, but He wanted that "You should. You must fight. This fight is arranged by Me." So these examples.

Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966:

Now, actually we see also. At least in India we have got this experience. Now, this Bhagavad-gītā... The Bhagavad-gītā, we always... We must always remember that it is being taught in the actual battlefield. Now, a great personality like Mahātmā Gandhi, he wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gītā nonviolence. He was... He was in favor of the doctrine of nonviolence. Now, you have seen Mahatma Gandhi's picture that he is always standing with Bhagavad-gītā like this. So Bhagavad-gītā was his life and soul practically. And in the morning he was having Bhagavad-gītā class; in the evening he was having Bhagavad-gītā class. So that was his life and soul. But unfortunately he interpreted Bhagavad-gītā in his own way. Although he took Bhagavad-gītā as his life and soul, so, but he interpreted it in his own way. That is not the way of understanding Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore such a great man and such a good man... He was not only a great man; he was very good man in the worldly estimation. His character, his behavior, his dealing—everything was good. He was ideal personality. But just see. He was killed by violence. He could not stop violence.

Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966:

He was killed by violence. And his idea... He wanted to make Hindu-Muslim unity in India. The British government fabricated the Hindu-Muslim riots, and lastly, at last also, their purpose was fulfilled by partition of India, Pakistan and India. Now, Mahatma Gandhi worked throughout his whole life just to make a unification of the Hindus and Muslims. Unfortunately, at last, he had to see that the Hindus and Muslims of India were divided into Pakistan and India. And his nonviolence also failed.

So, because if we do not follow the right person, mahājana—mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186)—then however I may be great in the estimation of the innocent public, that is wrong path. That is wrong path. Therefore the right thing is to follow the succession. Now, we have to follow the principle which Kṛṣṇa sets. Kṛṣṇa is not advocating, I mean to say, nonviolence. You cannot eradicate violence from this world. That is not possible because Kṛṣṇa Himself is on the battlefield and He is trying to induce Arjuna.

Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966:

That is real violence. In some years ago at Jhansi I was, not in the sannyāsa days. I went there, and, by invitation of some friends, and they wanted to give me some lectures. That was Gandhi's birthday, and they asked me to speak on some nonviolence. So I spoke that violence means to check a person from the discharge of his duties. That is violence. That was my viewpoint.

Lecture on BG 4.1 and Review -- New York, July 13, 1966:

Just like Mahatma Gandhi, Mahatma Gandhi. He also wrote an interpretation of Bhagavad-gītā, and he wanted to prove that from Bhagavad-gītā, nonviolence. How you can prove nonviolence from Bhagavad-gītā? The, the theme of Bhagavad-gītā is that Arjuna declined to fight and Lord Kṛṣṇa is just trying to induce him that "You must fight. You must fight." Ultimately, He said that "The program is already settled by Me. These people who have come here, they'll never return. They are destined to die. It is My program. Now, if you like, you can take the credit that you have conquered them." Last of all, He said like that. When the program is that the Bhagavad-gītā clearly says that in this case fighting is necessary, how can you prove that nonviolence is taught in Bhagavad-gītā? That is a different interpretation. You cannot interpret a thing which is, whose theme is different. The author, the author of Bhagavad-gītā... The author of the Bhagavad-gītā is saying very frankly that "the purpose of Bhagavad-gītā is now lost. So I am just trying to convince you. So you try to understand it." The purpose of Bhagavad-gītā is lost because they have been interpreted in a different way. So as soon as Bhagavad-gītā is interpreted in the way of a particular scholar or particular man, oh, then the purpose of Bhagavad-gītā is lost.

Lecture on BG 4.6-8 -- New York, July 20, 1966:

The purport of this verse is "O Lord Kṛṣṇa, You have assumed the form of Lord Buddha, taking compassion on the poor animals." Because Lord Buddha's preaching was to stop animal killing. Ahiṁsā, nonviolence. His main objective was to stop animal killing.

Lecture on BG 4.7 -- Montreal, June 13, 1968:

In that province there is a district Gayā. In that district Lord Buddha appeared. Lord appeared in Bihar province. He was kṣatriya, He was Hindu, and He propagated this religion of nonviolence, Buddhism.

His specific propaganda was to stop animal killing. So animal killing is recommended in the Vedic literature. Therefore people wanted to give him Vedic evidences that "In the Vedic literature animal sacrifice is recommended under certain condition. So how do you preach? You are Hindu and you are followers of Vedas. Why you are preaching nonviolence?" Therefore he had to give up Hindu religion. He said that "I do not care for your Vedas. It is my propaganda to stop animal killing. So if you follow me, then you must stop animal killing." Ahiṁsā paramo dharmaḥ. So later on, of course, Lord Buddha was patronized by a great emperor, Aśoka, and therefore practically all Indian population turned to be Buddhist, with few exceptions.

Lecture on BG 4.7-9 -- New York, July 22, 1966:

Just like I am repeatedly mentioned here that in our country Mahatma Gandhi, he had his philosophy of non-violence, and he wanted to prove non-violence from Bhagavad-gītā. But Bhagavad-gītā is spoken in the warfield. Bhagavad-gītā is spoken when Arjuna was in problem, whether to fight or not to fight. That is the, I mean the, background of Bhagavad-gītā. Now, if anyone wants to prove that Bhagava..., in Bhagavad-gītā there is non-violence, then you, you, you something else. Violence is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. So similarly, we should not try to under... Yes! We should not try to understand Bhagavad-gītā according to my viewpoint of view. I must understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is presented by Kṛṣṇa. Then it is (indistinct).

Lecture on BG 4.11 -- Bombay, March 31, 1974:

Anyway, Vedic injunction is there. So when Lord Buddha started this nonviolence, ahiṁsā paramo dharmaḥ, the Vedic scholars approached him that "How you can prescribe this ahiṁsā? There is already sanction in the Vedas, paśavo vadhāya sṛṣṭāḥ... How you can stop it?" So Lord Buddha said, "I don't care for your Vedas." Therefore he is considered as atheist. Anyone who doesn't care for Vedas, they are technically called as atheist. Veda nā māniyā bauddha haila nāstika. Nāstika means atheist.

Lecture on BG 4.14-19 -- New York, August 3, 1966:

Just like Arjuna, when he first refused to work, refused to fight, that "My dear Kṛṣṇa, it is not possible for me to fight with my relatives, brothers. I am not going to fight," but from material estimation, this conclusion, this decision of Arjuna, is very good, very good. So materially, from material standing of, standpoint of view, that he is not going to commit nonviolence, violence—he is nonviolent—he's very good man. But from spiritual point of view, it is not so. From spiritual point of view, it is not so. So one has to see. Simply by external features, that one is working and one is not working, that we cannot... What is the standard of work? Under what consciousness he's working. If he's working in material consciousness, then he's being bound up. However good may be that work, he's being bound up.

Lecture on BG 4.20-24 -- New York, August 9, 1966:

Now, this sacrifice of animals was protested by Lord Buddha. He deviated from the Hindu religion. Lord Buddha was born in Hindu family. He was kṣatriya. He was a king's son. But he wanted to preach nonviolence. He wanted to preach completely, to stop completely animal killing. But because in the Vedic... Of course, I have already explained that sacrifice of animals, as stated in the Vedas, they are not for killing. They are meant for giving a new life to the animal. By Vedic mantra... The Vedic mantra are so powerful that that was a test how a dead animal can get, regain new body. An old animal is sacrificed and it gets a new youthful life. That was the test. It was not meant for killing. Don't misunderstand that sacrifice.

Lecture on BG 6.16-24 -- Los Angeles, February 17, 1969:

Just see, a sparrow is trying to dry up the ocean. (laughs) This is called determination. Just like our Gandhi. He declared war against the Britishers. War is that non-violent, noncooperation. You see? But the determination was there. That "I must drive away the Britishers." And he did it. And what is the weapon? Nonviolence. "All right, you fight, you kill me, I shall not attack you." You see? He became, what is that? Determination. People laughed. "Gandhi is declaring war with the Britishers, so powerful, British Empire." And actually after the Britishers lost India, they lost all Empire. Because that was the jewel of British Empire. They lost all possession in the Far East, they lost possession in Egypt, they lost possession on Suez Canal, everything lost. So determination is so nice thing.

Lecture on BG 10.4-5 -- New York, January 4, 1967:

So we have to understand these qualifications. Intelligence. Buddhiḥ means intelligence. Jñānam means knowledge. Asammohaḥ means freedom from illusion. Kṣamā. Kṣamā, forgiveness. Satyam, truth. Damaḥ. Damaḥ means controlling the senses, and samaḥ, to keep the mind equibalanced. Sukham means happiness. Duḥkham, distress, bhava means birth. Abhāva. Abhāva means death, bhayam, fear, and abhayam, fearlessness. Ahiṁsā, nonviolence; samatā, equality; tuṣṭiḥ, satisfaction; tapaḥ, penance; dānam charity; yaśaḥ, fame; ayaśaḥ, defamation; bhavanti, "all these become," bhāvāḥ... Bhāva means state of being. Bhūtānām, "of all living entities;" mattaḥ, "from Me;" eva, certainly; pṛthag-vidhāḥ, differently. Because Kṛṣṇa has declared already, aham ādir hi devānām (BG 10.2). Maharṣīṇāṁ ca sarva. He is the original cause of everything.

Lecture on BG 13.6-7 -- Montreal, October 25, 1968:

Therefore the first condition of acquiring knowledge is adambhitvam. Amānitvam adambhitvam. First of all to deny that "I am not matter. I am..." Then "If I am not matter, then I am God." Oh, then Kṛṣṇa says, "No. That is your false pride. You are not God." Adambhitvam. Amānitvam adambhitvam ahiṁsā (BG 13.8). Then nonviolence. As soon as one is a realized soul, he will be nonviolent. These are the different stages of acquiring knowledge. And when one is in full knowledge of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he becomes qualified with all the good qualities, all the good godly qualities. The Bhāgavata says, yasyāsti bhaktir bhagavaty akiñcanā sarvair guṇais tatra samāsate surāḥ (SB 5.18.12) If one is actually in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then all godly, good qualities will develop. Because we are part and parcel of God, the godly qualities are there. It is simply covered. Just like the fire is covered by ashes. If you fan out the ashes, then the fire comes out.

Lecture on BG 13.8-12 -- Bombay, October 2, 1973:

To become humble, meek, ahiṁsā, non-violence, śānti, tolerance. In this way you have to make progress. The other items will be described by and by. We have to... Yes. Tomorrow we shall describe. Thank you very much. Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on BG 13.8-12 -- Bombay, October 5, 1973:

So we have been discussing for the last few days about the process of knowledge. So we have discussed already amānitvam, humbleness. Amānitvam adambhitvam ahiṁsā (BG 13.8). Ahiṁsā, non-violence. So ahiṁsā kṣāntiḥ, tolerance, ārjavam, simplicity. These things we have already discussed.

Now another important thing is ācāryopāsanam. If you want to make progress, then you have to approach ācārya. Just like if you want to be educated, you go to school, you go to college, you go to university, similarly, if you want to be advanced in knowledge... knowledge means not this material knowledge. Actual knowledge is to advance in spiritual knowledge.

Lecture on BG 13.13 -- Bombay, October 6, 1973:

Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is. We cannot use the ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya (Cc. Ādi-līlā 5.176)—half. I take half of the hen. I take the rear part, and the front part I reject. This kind of logic, argument, will not be very successful. You have to take as it is, in toto, and you have to understand. That is understanding of Bhagavad-gītā. If you take something to your choice, that is useless, useless waste of time. Just like Mahatma Gandhi, he wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gītā nonviolence. How it is possible? Bhagavad-gītā is spoken in the battlefield. So in this way, if we try to understand Bhagavad-gītā, it will be not Bhagavad-gītā, it will be something else. We must understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is. That is our preaching method. We are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is all over the world. So we accept.

Lecture on BG 15.15 -- August 5, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm):

He wants water, you give him water. Don't manufacture better thing. Just like Kṛṣṇa wanted Arjuna to fight, and he became a nonviolent saint, "No, Kṛṣṇa, I'll not fight." That is disobedience. Kṛṣṇa says fight, you must fight. Don't bring philosophy of nonviolence. That is nonsense. What He says, do it. That is service. That he did later on. Sometimes they misunderstand Bhagavad-gītā, that Arjuna is not willing to fight and Kṛṣṇa is inducing him to fight. They misunderstand that Arjuna is better than Kṛṣṇa. But that's not the fact. What Kṛṣṇa says, we have to execute that. We should not manufacture our own ideas. That is not service.

Lecture on BG 16.2-7 -- Bombay, April 8, 1971:

Now, Arjuna is encouraged because Arjuna was thinking in the terms of material calculation. Just like Gandhi introduced this nonviolence. That is material calculation. It is all right. To become nonviolent is good qualification. But from spiritual calculation... Spiritual calculation means that surrendering unto Kṛṣṇa and then act. The difference between bhakti-yoga and ordinary karma is this: that when one's senses are purified under the direction of Kṛṣṇa or His representative, that is bhakti. Hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa-sevanaṁ bhaktir ucyate.

Lecture on BG 16.2-7 -- Bombay, April 8, 1971:

So here Kṛṣṇa is encouraging Arjuna, mā śucaḥ: "Don't think that because I am engaging you to fight, don't think that you are demonic person." Because generally, people take, when one fights, he is considered to be violent demon. But Kṛṣṇa has already encouraged Arjuna to fight, but here he says that "These are the godly qualities." Apaiśunam, nonviolence, ahiṁsā kṣāntir ārjavam, ahiṁsā. These things have been stated. So because Arjuna is Kṛṣṇa's very intimate and dear friend, immediately He says... As soon as He says that daivī sampad vimokṣāya nibandhāyāsurī matā (BG 16.5). Āsurī matā. This asurika fighting or asurika qualities, this is the cause of being entangled in this material existence. So Arjuna may be thinking that "I am fighting. I am also in asurika sampat." So Kṛṣṇa (is) immediately encouraging him, mā śucaḥ. Mā śucaḥ sampadaṁ daivīm abhijāto 'si bhārata: "Don't think that you are in the asurika sampat." Why? He was fighting, he was killing. Why Kṛṣṇa says that "You are in the daivī sampat"? The thing is that he is fighting not for himself; he is fighting for Kṛṣṇa. That is the secret. He was fighting for Kṛṣṇa.

Personally he was not inclined to fight. Nonviolent.

Lecture on BG 18.45 -- Durban, October 11, 1975:

Just like in our country, Mahatma Gandhi, he also, he was here. He gave so much service. He gave service in India. But what was the return? The return was he was killed by his countrymen. This is the return, practical. The return was that he wanted to establish nonviolence, and his countrymen proved that nonviolence cannot go on—"You must die by violence." This is material world, that however you may render service to your family, to your country, to your friend, to anyone, you will never be satisfied. Rather, when he is dissatisfied he will kill you. This is material world. So my occupational duty is to render service to somebody, but I cannot satisfy that somebody. This is material world. You go on giving service, but you will never be able to satisfy to the person to whom you are giving service. This is material world.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Delhi, November 12, 1973:

So it becomes sometimes lost. When the paramparā system... Just like nowadays, everyone is proud of reading Bhagavad-gītā, but he interprets in his own way. Everyone is at liberty to interpret Bhagavad-gītā as he likes. That is the modern proposal. So there are 664 editions of Bhagavad-gītā. Everyone is commenting in his own way. I have heard that there is one doctor, some rabbi. He has interpreted Bhagavad-gītā as the talks between a patient and a physician. You see? So this is going on. Everyone whimsically, he is interpreting. Sometimes in our country also, we see that Mahatma Gandhi wanted to interpret Bhagavad-gītā as nonviolence. It is very difficult to prove, because Bhagavad-gītā is spoken in the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra. (laughs) So how you can prove nonviolence? So it is a difficult job. So that is not the process of understanding Bhagavad-gītā. Bhagavad-gītā is to be understood, as our Swamiji immediately talked, that it has to be received from the paramparā system.

Lecture on SB 1.2.9-10 -- Delhi, November 14, 1973:

Just like Arjuna fought. Arjuna fought not for sense gratification. He fought for satisfying Kṛṣṇa. Because Arjuna, first of all, he was trying to satisfy his senses. He said to Kṛṣṇa, "My dear Kṛṣṇa, they are all my relatives. The other side: my grandfather, my brothers, my nephews, my son-in-laws. Oh, how can I fight with them?" This consideration was for sense gratification. He was thinking that "In this way I shall be satisfied." Personally. But there was no question of satisfying Kṛṣṇa. But when he understood that his business was to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, then he agreed. Kṛṣṇa inquired, "Whether you have now decided to fight or not?" He said, "Yes." Naṣṭo mohaḥ smṛtir labdhā: "I have now got back my memory, and my moha, illusion, is now lost." Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava (BG 18.73). "I shall fight." So this fighting was service to Kṛṣṇa. It is not sense gratification. Rather, when he was trying to become nonviolent, very good man, not to fight, sacrifice for the other party, that was sense gratification.

Lecture on SB 1.2.13 -- Los Angeles, August 16, 1972:

Just like Dhruva Mahārāja. Dhruva Mahārāja was a young boy, he was insulted by his stepmother. Son of a kṣatriya, they were very proud family, even a five-year-old boy could not tolerate the insult. A kṣatriya cannot tolerate insult, immediately sword. Not that nonviolence. Nonviolence is not for kṣatriya. Therefore it is said, varṇāśrama-vibhāgaśaḥ—you cannot stop violence. There must be violence, but kṣatriyas, they know how to use violence. That is different thing. So he was insulted and he went to his mother, "Stepmother has insulted me like this," he began to cry in front of his mother. She said,"How can I help you, my dear boy? Your father does not care for me, even like the maidservants."

Lecture on SB 1.2.13 -- Vrndavana, October 24, 1972:

The purpose is to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. When he was denying to fight, that was his own satisfaction. "I shall not kill my grandfather, my nephews, my brother on the other side. If they die, I shall be unhappy. So what is the use of killing them?" These are all sense gratification, so-called nonviolence. A devotee does not know what is violence and non-violence. He wants to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. That's all. They do not know what is morality or immorality. They want to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. Just like the gopīs. At dead of night, they went to Kṛṣṇa. This is immorality. But they did not know what is morality or immorality. They must go to Kṛṣṇa. Saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam (SB 1.2.13).

Lecture on SB 1.2.18 -- Calcutta, September 26, 1974:

Simply how to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. That is bhakti. Ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānuśīlanam. Ānukūlyena. Ānukūlyena means what is favorable, what Kṛṣṇa desires. Just like Arjuna. He did not like to fight. He wanted to be a very nice, nonviolent gentleman. But Kṛṣṇa was inducing him, "You fight." Then later on, he agreed: "Yes, kariṣye vacanaṁ tava (BG 18.73)." This is ānukūlyena. "Kṛṣṇa wants it. Doesn't matter whether it is violent or nonviolent, Kṛṣṇa wants it. I must do it." This is called ānukūlyena, not against the desire of Kṛṣṇa, but in favor of Kṛṣṇa. This is called anukūla, anukūla-sevā. So ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānuśīlanaṁ bhaktir uttamā (CC Madhya 19.167). That is first-class bhakti. Not that "If I like it, then I shall do it." That is not anukūla. That is pratikūla. You like or not like, that doesn't matter. Kṛṣṇa likes it,; you must do it. That is ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānuśīlanam.

Lecture on SB 1.2.26 -- Vrndavana, November 6, 1972:

They do not know. I was just talking with Guru dāsa. Sometimes in the year 1950 or '51 I went to Jhansi, and it happened so that the..., the friend in whose house I was staying, he was a leader, and there was a meeting for Gandhi's disappearance day. So I was asked to speak. At that time I was not sannyāsī. I was asked to speak something on nonviolence. So I explained that violence means if you have got some right and if somebody by force stops you to utilize your right, that is violence. That is violence. I have got some right to take something, so, or enter in some room, and, if somebody checks me by force, that "You cannot enter," that is violence and it is criminal.

Lecture on SB 1.2.26 -- Vrndavana, November 6, 1972:
So this is actually India's culture. So I explained in that meeting that "After many, many births, one is given the opportunity to take birth in this holy land of Bhāratavarṣa. Unfortunately, you people, you are, by force, making them materialist. They had the opportunity to take advantage of the contribution of great sages, ṛṣis, to study and to become a successful human being, but you are, by force, dragging them from that attitude to this materialistic way of life. This is violence. This is violence. What you are speaking of, nonsense, nonviolence? This is violence." So about twenty years ago I was thinking like that. So actually, people are being killed not only in India, but outside also, by these blind leaders. They do not know how to lead people, how to make them happy, how to make them successful in their human form of life.
Lecture on SB 1.3.24 -- Los Angeles, September 29, 1972:

So God Himself becomes so much disturbed that these rascals are simply killing. At that time, of course, the Buddha religion was not there. The so-called followers of the Vedic religion. In the Vedas there are sanction for killing animal in a special sacrifice, but people took it as general, and they began to kill animals like anything, under the protection of Veda. Therefore when Lord Buddha began to preach his philosophy, ahiṁsā, nonviolence, he did not accept the authority of Vedas. Because people will misuse it. Therefore he said that "I don't care for your Vedas." Just like Lord Jesus Christ rebelled against the whole Testament. He formulated his own testament, New Testament. Similarly, Lord Buddha also, he rejected Vedas and He presented his own philosophy: ahiṁsā, nonviolence. Ahiṁsā paramo dharmaḥ. Because he was very kind upon on the poor animals. Sadaya-hṛdaya darśita-paśu-ghātam. Paśu-ghātam means animal killing. Nindasi yajña-vidher ahaha śruti-jātam. Śruti-jātam. Śruti means Veda. So in the Vedas, although there are, in particular cases, there are animal sacrifice... That is also very restricted. But we cannot say that there is no animal sacrifice. There is in some cases. So Lord Buddha, nindasi, He decried, "No, I don't accept your Vedas." Therefore Buddha religion is different from Vedic religion, because he rejected Vedas. And the Vedic followers, because he rejected Vedic principles, Vedic followers said that he, "You are nāstika." Nāstika means unbeliever.

Lecture on SB 1.5.12-13 -- New Vrindaban, June 11, 1969:

Therefore Arjuna says that "Kṛṣṇa, whatever You are speaking in the Bhagavad-gītā, I accept in toto." That is study of Bhagavad-gītā. I do not select, "Oh, this portion is nice. I accept." Ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya: (Cc. Ādi-līlā 5.176) "The back portion is nice. It is giving, the hen, daily, one egg. It is very nice. And the mouth portion is expensive. Cut it." The fool does not know if you cut this portion, that portion will be stopped also. So these, all these ordinary commentator... Just like Gandhi. He wanted to prove his nonviolence some way or other from Bhagavad-gītā. How he can prove? This is the same thing, that he was finding out, "If there is something, simply cutting the head, if I can get egg?" That is not possible. That is not... If we have to accept Bhagavad-gītā just like Arjuna says, that sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi keśava: (BG 10.14) "My dear Kṛṣṇa, Keśava, whatever You are saying, I accept in toto. And this is confirmed by such authorities like Devala, Vyāsa, Asita. It is not that because we are friends, I am accepting You, but I know it is confirmed by such great authorities like Nārada, Asita, Vyāsa."

Lecture on SB 1.5.13 -- New Vrindaban, June 16, 1969:

Of course, Kṛṣṇa is physician in other way. But he has tried to explain the medical science through the Bhagavad-gītā-anatomy, physiology, medicine, like that. Just like Gandhi, he wanted to prove Bhagavad-gītā as nonviolence. In this way, everyone is trying. But actually who is understanding Kṛṣṇa? That is being explained by Nārada, that "In this way, people will misunderstand. You simply apply, simply write and explain the science of Kṛṣṇa."

Therefore in the, from the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, from the beginning, Vyāsadeva offers his obeisances to the Supreme, satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi, janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) "I am just offering my obeisances unto the Supreme Absolute Truth, who is the source of everything." And in the beginning he also writes, oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya. Then he aims Kṛṣṇa. Vāsudeva means Kṛṣṇa. But he explains philosophically what Kṛṣṇa is: janmādy asya yataḥ anvayāt itarataś ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ (SB 1.1.1). "Kṛṣṇa, the Vāsudeva, is the original source of everything." Janmādy asya yataḥ. That is the Vedānta philosophy.

Lecture on SB 1.5.13 -- New Vrindaban, June 16, 1969:

The example is that just like the root of the tree is the source of distribution of energy. Then pour water in the root, not in the leaves, not in the branches. So people are enamored by the branches and leaves and flowers. They are inventing so many societies, humanitarian societies, altruistic societies, nonviolent societies, United Nation, this, that, all nonsense. Simply concentrate in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Everything will be right. That they do not know. Vyavasāyātmikā buddhir ekeha... (BG 2.41) One. This is intelligence, how to act. Just work on one switch, and everything will be right. That they do not know.

Lecture on SB 1.7.24 -- Vrndavana, September 21, 1976:

No, that is not Kṛṣṇa's instruction. We do not allow any lazy man. He must be engaged. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. That is Kṛṣṇa's order. Niyataṁ kuru karma. Arjuna was refusing to fight. He was trying to be nonviolent gentleman. Kṛṣṇa did not allow him. "No, no, you cannot do that. That is your weakness." Kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ viṣame samupasthitam: "You are proving yourself rascal. It is anārya-juṣṭam. This kind of proposal is for the anārya, uncivilized man. Don't do that." That is Kṛṣṇa's... So don't think that Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious, they'll become lazy and imitate Haridāsa Ṭhākura. That is not Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Kṛṣṇa consciousness means, as Kṛṣṇa instructs, you must be very, very busy, twenty-four hours. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Not to become a lazy fellow, eat and sleep. No.

Lecture on SB 1.7.25 -- Vrndavana, September 22, 1976:

When Arjuna wanted to become nonviolent, so He gave him instruction that "There is no question of nonviolence. You are talking like an anārya, uncivilized man." Kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ viṣame samupasthitam. "In warfield, and you are talking of nonviolence, rascal. There is no question of nonviolence. You have to fight." So he was still arguing. Then he finally said, "My dear Arjuna, you fight or don't fight. It doesn't matter. They are not going to return. They'll be finished here. That is My arrangement." He says, nimitta-mātraṁ bhava savyasācin: "They're not going to return." It is Kṛṣṇa's arrangement.

Lecture on SB 1.7.28-29 -- Vrndavana, September 25, 1976:
A kṣatriya, he is expert in the military science, how to kill. So the killing art is there. You cannot make it null and void by advocating nonviolence. No. That is required. Violence is also a part of the society. Just like here is some itching sensation. This is violence. That is required for the comfort. So similarly, Arjuna was kṣatriya. He knew the art of killing, and still, Kṛṣṇa is... Kṛṣṇa also, He appeared as a kṣatriya in the dynasty of kṣatriyas. Vāsudeva, son of Vasudeva. He also knew the art of killing. That is also one of the part of His business. Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata (BG 4.7), paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām (BG 4.8). So vināśa-requires violence.

So we cannot decry violence. That is also required. Kṛṣṇa was speaking Bhagavad-gītā, the science of God, in the battlefield of Kurukṣetra. We cannot condemn violence. That is not possible. But there is no violence in the spiritual world. That is a fact.

Lecture on SB 1.7.34-35 -- Vrndavana, September 28, 1976:

So bhagavān ambujekṣaṇaḥ. Although He's angry, although He's the Supreme Lord, Bhagavān... He's not so-called nonviolent. How nonviolent? Nonviolent or violent. Violence is also one of the qualifications of God. Especially in political matters, when the kṣatriyas are dealing, there is always violence. Without violence, kṣatriya has no meaning. Kṣat, kṣat means injury. Trāyate. Kṣatriya's duty is to save the citizen from being injured by others. That is kṣatriya. Even an animal. Animal..., just like this Kali was trying to kill cow. Mahārāja Parīkṣit was on his tour. He saw that a black man was trying to kill a cow. So immediately he took his sword, "Who are you, rascal? You are trying to kill a cow in my kingdom?" That is kṣatriya's duty.

Lecture on SB 1.8.46 -- Los Angeles, May 8, 1973:

So such Bhīṣma was so affectionate to the Pāṇḍavas. So Kṛṣṇa wanted... Bhīṣma was lying on the bed of arrows, preparing for his death. So Kṛṣṇa wanted that these Pāṇḍavas should go to Bhīṣma and hear his instruction. Therefore, despite His advice to Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, that "There was no wrong on your part. You are thinking that you have killed, or for your sake so many men have been killed. That is not... You are not responsible for that. You are not sinful..." For a kṣatriya, killing is not sinful. For a brāhmaṇa, sacrificing an animal in the arena, that is not sinful. So it is all explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, sa doṣam api na tyajet (BG 18.48). Killing is bad, but a kṣatriya's business is to kill. Without killing, one cannot become perfect kṣatriya. Because he has to give protection, and there are so many demons, rascals. So if the king becomes nonviolent, how other citizens will be given protection? No.

Lecture on SB 1.8.46 -- Los Angeles, May 8, 1973:

So for kṣatriya, just like Mahārāja Parīkṣit... If kṣatriya becomes nonviolent... Just like our Mahatma Gandhi started nonviolence in politics. So that was a political policy, but in politics there is no question of nonviolence, in politics. That is foolishness. Actually, India gained independence not by nonviolence. That is a great history. India gained independence... Gandhi was fighting with nonviolence for thirty, thirty-five years; there was no result. But one of the leaders, when he, I mean to say, ensued fighting, then within, I think, within one year the Britishers left. So in politics there is no question of nonviolence. So a king, a protector, kṣatriya... Kṣatriya means kṣat... Kṣat means injury, injury. And tra, tra means deliver. So a kṣatriya's business is to deliver a person who is going to be injured. That is kṣatriya. Just like this cow was going to be injured, and as soon as Mahārāja Parīkṣit saw it, he immediately took his sword to kill him. So this is kṣatriya.

Lecture on SB 1.8.50 -- Los Angeles, May 12, 1973:

Just like Gandhi used to say. Somebody questioned him that "If somebody comes and violates the chastity of your daughter in your presence, what will you do?" He said, "I shall remain nonviolent." But that is not śāstric injunction. This is foolishness.

If somebody is aggressor, he must be killed immediately. Dharma-yuddha. Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja is thinking that "Although there was fight, the fight was between our own men, my brother, my nephews, my grandfather. So they are family members. I have killed them for my kingdom." He is thinking in that way. He is a pious man. Violence is required. We don't say nonviolence.

Lecture on SB 1.8.50 -- Los Angeles, May 12, 1973:

Therefore as there is danger... Suppose Caitanya Mahāprabhu has taught us that "Be tolerant," but not that where violence is required we should be tolerant. No. Just like while Nityānanda Prabhu was injured by Jagāi and Mādhāi, He wanted to immediately kill him. Similarly, nonviolence does not mean that in right causes also you will remain nonviolent. No. You do not attack anybody unnecessarily. You do not kill unnecessarily animal even, not even an ant. You should be nonviolent by your nature. But when there is aggression, there are enemies, the śāstra says, dharma-yuddha. That is dharma-yuddha.

Lecture on SB 1.10.1 -- Mayapura, June 16, 1973:

So fighting whimsically by the politicians, that is not sanctioned. There must be dharma-yuddha. Dharma-yuddha means religious fight, fight on religious principles. So what was the religious principle? (aside:) Hm, where is that mat? (Bengali) Saccidānanda. Here it is said, hatvā ātatāyinaḥ. Ātatāyī means aggressor. If somebody comes to your home to kidnap your wife, to take by force your property or to set fire in your house, he is called ātatāyī. He should immediately be killed. It is not that nonviolence nonsense. If somebody is coming to attack you unnecessarily, you must kill him first. It is not Vaiṣṇavism... "Oh, this man is coming to kill me. Right. All right, let me embrace him." No. That is not the rule. When there is ātatāyī, aggressor, you must fight, you must kill. That is religious.

Lecture on SB 1.15.35 -- Los Angeles, December 13, 1973:

So everyone can say, "I have got my own religion, you have got your own religion. Why you trouble to convert me or convert...?" They say like that. But actually dharma does not mean that, that you make your own sentiment, I make my own sentiment. No. That is not dharma. Your sentiment, your creation of dharma... Just like the, our Gandhi in India. He was preaching nonviolence. Nonviolence. So some Hindus approached him, "Sir, you are preaching nonviolence. These Muhammadans, they are killing cows, so why don't you ask them to stop, nonviolence?" So he replied, "Oh, this is their religion. How can I stop?" What is this nonsense? If you believe in philosophy of nonviolence, one may say that "This is my religion," that you cannot indulge in that? If somebody says, just like state is neutral to religion, if somebody says, "My religion is to cut throat," the state will allow, "Go on with your religion. Yes, it is your religion"? Will the state allow? No.

Lecture on SB 1.16.36 -- Tokyo, January 30, 1974:

Just like when there is attack in a country, the king or the president gives protection to the citizens by killing the enemies. So his business is to give protection to the citizens. So it may be sometimes by killing others, he gives protection. We have discussed many times the violence and nonviolence. Non... These are contradictory terms, but when these two contradictory things are found in saintly persons, we must know they are all the same, absolute. And what to speak of when these actions are found in Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is the absolute nature. Absolute, to understand the absolute nature means two plus two equal two, one plus one equal to one, and one minus one equal to one. This is absolute understanding. Pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate (Īśo Invocation). Pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya. One is complete number, pūrṇam. Pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya. And if you take away complete one, still it is one. This is absolute understanding. It is not that one has been taken away from one; therefore it has become zero. No. That is material. That is relative.

Lecture on SB 2.3.1 -- Los Angeles, May 19, 1972:

So andhā yathāndhair upanīyamānāḥ (SB 7.5.31). Just like one blind man is speaking other blind men, "Please follow me. I shall lead you to the right path." "But you are blind yourself, and we are also blind. What will be the help?" But no, they will follow. In our country, Gandhi promised that "I shall give you independence in one year, if you follow me—non-violence, non-cooperation." People followed, but it took thirty years. But actually, that is not independence. So these politicians, especially, they mislead us. Not only politicians, the so-called yogis, so-called... So many things. Real leader is Kṛṣṇa. So if we surrender to Kṛṣṇa as Kṛṣṇa says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66), "Give up all other occupation, duties. Simply just surrender unto Me." Ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ. "Don't hesitate. Do it." Kṛṣṇa is personally canvassing. He's so kind. He comes personally. He speaks the whole truth in the Bhagavad-gītā.

Lecture on SB 3.25.11 -- Bombay, November 11, 1974:

Dhūlī means dust, and bhavāmbudhi is water. So if you are thrown into the water, you may be a very big swimmer, but it is a struggle. It is. There is no peace. Therefore in this material world, however expert you may be to deal with this material world, it is simply struggle. You cannot live here peacefully. That is not possible. Even you become nonviolent, if you don't harm anybody... In our country the ideal man was Mahatma Gandhi. Still, he was killed. Just see. This is material world. This is material world. He was doing harm to nobody, but he was killed. So bhavāmbudhi, in this material world, or ocean, you may be very expert in swimming, but that does not mean you'll be peaceful. That is not possible. But if you are taken away from the water even one inch, you'll find peace. Therefore the prayer is tava pāda-paṅkaja-sthita-dhūlī-sadṛśam. Just as from the water, if you are taken one inch up, then you become, you feel relieved, similarly, some way or other, if you become one of the particles of the dust of lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, then you are liberated.

Lecture on SB 3.26.28 -- Bombay, January 5, 1975:

Nothing is stopped, but you cannot do any unlawful. Bhakti does not mean you can do anything unlawful. But ultimate issue: whatever you do, if it is for Kṛṣṇa, that is rightful. Just like materially, Arjuna was trying to become very gentleman, nonviolent, Arjuna: "Kṛṣṇa, I am not going to fight." People very much appreciate, "Just see, Arjuna is so gentle, he is trying to become nonviolent, and Kṛṣṇa is inducing him to become violent." This is the vision of the demons. They do not know, whatever Kṛṣṇa desires, that is rightful. Kṛṣṇa wanted Arjuna to fight. That is rightful. And Arjuna wanted to become nonviolent. That is not rightful.

Lecture on SB 5.5.27 -- Vrndavana, November 14, 1976:

Caitanya Mahāprabhu was not a rascal, but He presented Himself as a rascal because we are rascals. These people of this age, they are all rascals. Therefore he presented Himself, guru more mūrkha dekhi' karila śāsana: "My guru saw Me a great rascal; therefore he has asked Me, chastised Me, that 'You rascal, You cannot understand Vedānta. You cannot read even.' " Mūrkha tumi nāhi tomāra vedānta adhikāra: "You cannot read Vedānta." That means the rascals of this age, what they will understand Vedānta? He will simply misrepresent. They will simply mislead the persons. You see so many big, big politicians, scholars, simply misleading people from Bhagavad-gītā. Bhagavad-gītā is spoken on the battlefield, and they want to prove that it is nonviolence. In this way people are being misled.

Lecture on SB 6.1.1-4 -- Melbourne, May 20, 1975:

They have usurped our kingdom. That's all right. They are also our own men. Let them enjoy. But I am not going to kill them." This is Vaiṣṇava. Because he is a devotee, in spite of being harrassed by the other party... Wife was insulted, then kingdom was taken by betting, by gambling. In this way they were put into so many troublesome position. Still, when there was actual fight, because Arjuna was a Vaiṣṇava, devotee, he said, "Let them enjoy. I am not going to fight." This is Vaiṣṇava. Ordinary man would have taken very seriously, "Oh, these people have insulted like that. They have taken our... Yes, we must fight." So Vaiṣṇava by naturally, by nature, is not violent.

Lecture on SB 6.1.9 -- Nellore, January 7, 1976:

Therefore in the śāstra the process of charity is recommended. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is also recommended that yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-kriya na tyājyaṁ kāryam eva tat. Because I have renounced this world, it does not mean I shall give up the process of performing yajña, dāna, and tapasya. It is further stressed, yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-kriya pāvanāni manīṣiṇāḥ. Even if you think that you are very advanced, still, you should not give up these three processes, means performing yajña, giving in charity, and performing tapasya. "One must then control the mind and senses, give charity, be truthful, clean, and nonviolent, follow the regulative principle, and regularly chant the holy name of the Lord. Thus a sober and faithful person who knows the religious principle is temporarily purified of all sins performed with his body, words, and mind."

Lecture on SB 6.1.12 -- Los Angeles, June 25, 1975:

So this is the position. So they do not believe in the next life, and what to speak of cats' and dogs' life. "Never mind." Everything is very dark. Therefore, unless we take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, the human civilization is doomed. It is not human civilization. Human civilization is responsible life. Actually, we are being educated, we go to school, to college, to become responsible man. So this responsibility should be "How to stop this repetition of birth." In many places this is advised. And that is the only aim of human life. Punar-janma-jayāya. I have told you many times that when Viśvāmitra Muni went to Daśaratha Mahārāja to take Rāmacandra and Lakṣmaṇa to kill one demon in the forest... Viśvāmitra Muni is brāhmaṇa. He was so powerful, he could himself kill that demon, but because he is brāhmaṇa, he is not allowed to kill. A brāhmaṇa must be nonviolent.

Lecture on SB 6.1.12 -- Honolulu, May 13, 1976:

There is a Bengali proverb that one girl was to dance on the stage. So in Indian civilization the girls or the woman, they cover their head with..., from superiors. So nāste vase guntala(?). She has gone to dance on the stage, and she is pulling on the veil. "Now, where is the opportunity of here to become a household wife? You have come to dance." So similarly, Arjuna was chastised that "You have come to fight, and now you are becoming very nonviolent, atheist..., er, theist. What is...? So this is anārya. You have to do your duty in proper place." That is Aryanism. That is ārya. Ārya-samāj means one who knows his duty, how to do it in proper time. So kṣatriya, his duty is to fight, to defend from the hands of the enemy. So he was declining to fight, so He chastised him, "Non-Aryans. You are not Aryan.

Lecture on SB 6.1.15 -- Nellore, January 8, 1976:

So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is teaching how to become desirous to serve Kṛṣṇa. This teaching, perfection of instruction, we find in the Bhagavad-gītā when Arjuna says kariṣye vacanaṁ tava (BG 18.73): "I shall execute what You order me." Te vacanaṁ tava: "I shall execute any order which You order me." Arjuna was a warrior, soldier. When he was... Before his hearing Bhagavad-gītā he was a soldier, and after hearing Bhagavad-gītā he remained a soldier. But in the beginning of the fight he was not willing to fight with his brothers. Although Kṛṣṇa was speaking to him that "You fight," he was declining. This is the stage of abhakta, or nondevotee. Although mundane person will very much be pleased that "Arjuna was not willing to fight. He is nonviolent," but Kṛṣṇa was not accepting. So fighting is not a good business, so Arjuna was declining to fight. It was good from the worldly point of view. But after hearing Bhagavad-gītā, when Kṛṣṇa inquired from Arjuna, "What you have decided?" Arjuna replied, naṣṭo mohaḥ smṛtir labdhā kariṣye vacanaṁ tava (BG 18.73): "Now I am quite in knowledge. I shall execute Your order." This is mukti.

Lecture on SB 6.1.40 -- Surat, December 22, 1970:

So this is taught also in the Bhagavad-gītā. Amānitvam adambhitvam. No false pride. Then ahiṁsā. Unless one is prideless, unless one is humble, it is not possible to become nonviolent. So this nonviolence is also there, the Vaiṣṇava. So automatically they don't encourage animal-killing. So every religion, the highest principle of any religion is there in Vaiṣṇavites, or the followers of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Any best thing, in any religion, you will find in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Therefore it is perfect. Buddha religion teaches ahiṁsā; the Kṛṣṇa conscious people are ahiṁsā. Lord Jesus teaches love of God; they are the best lover of God. And Hindu religion teaches liberation; they are... As soon as they become Kṛṣṇa conscious, immediately they are liberated, immediately, instantly. There is no question of asking for liberation. Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura says liberation means... What is that? Liberation from this material hankering. And what is that material hankering? To satisfy the senses. So these devotees, they are not for satisfying their senses. They are simply trying to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa said that sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). They are determined to preach this cult, that "You surrender to Kṛṣṇa." Therefore they are actual representative of Kṛṣṇa. Immediately they are liberated. So, so far liberation is concerned, there is. So far ahiṁsā, nonviolence, there is.

Lecture on SB 6.1.46 -- Detroit, June 12, 1976:

So unless people accept this principle, that Kṛṣṇa center, their, all their plans will be futile. Moghāśā mogha-karmāṇo mogha-jñānā (BG 9.12), everything. You try the history. They are trying to do so many things, planning. In every country, there is a planning commission, but according to Bhagavad-gītā, any plan you do, it is all rascaldom if it is without Kṛṣṇa. It will fail. History will... Take, for example, in our India, Mahātmā Gandhi made so many plans to get our independence. He was taking Bhagavad-gītā in his hand and publicly said that "I get solace from Bhagavad-gītā." He was very fond of Bhagavad-gītā. But unfortunately he could not make Kṛṣṇa as center. This is the unfortunate. Therefore whole plan failed. Gandhi wanted nonviolence—failed. Gandhi wanted Hindu-Muslim unity—failed. Why? Because he never said that Kṛṣṇa is the center. Find his lecture. He'll never say Kṛṣṇa. Missing. Kṛṣṇa is missing. Similarly, so many... One French professor has admitted, Aurobindo or Dr. Radhakrishnan, they have written Bhagavad-gītā, annotation, so many others also, but Kṛṣṇa is missing. They're faulty. Kṛṣṇa is missing. Through Bhagavad-gītā, they want to make the society Kṛṣṇa-less. That is their policy. So nothing has become... For the last two hundred, three hundred years, from India so many swamis, yogis came. But because they missed Kṛṣṇa, it was all useless. And now this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, because we are making Kṛṣṇa as the center, you see practically, thousands of devotees. Successful.

Lecture on SB 6.1.67 -- Vrndavana, September 3, 1975:

Just like the tree. It does not do any harm to anyone. Rather, it is very hospitable. It gives shelter to the people. They are taking fruits, they are taking branches, leaves, sometimes cutting. They are very harmless, but still, there is harm, suffering. Must stand there for five thousand years and scorching heat and pinching winter, storm, and sometimes fall down. The suffering is there. Even we become a nonviolent... Even Gandhi. He was nonviolent, very moralist. Still he was killed. Just see. This is material world. He was killed by bullet. So the material world means suffering. So what is the use of making a prolonged life? Prolonged suffering. Therefore it is said, aghāyuḥ. If you live for a moment as a devotee, your life is successful. And if you live for many thousands of years without any Kṛṣṇa consciousness—aghāyuḥ, useless life, useless. Aghāyur aśucir malāt, because the desire is there, kāma and lobha, greediness and lusty desire.

Lecture on SB 6.2.9-10 -- Allahabad, January 15, 1971:

So everything is there, but His activity and our activity is different. If Kṛṣṇa is angry... Just like He becomes angry and He kills so many demons. But all of them got liberation. Therefore His anger and our anger is not the same. If we become angry unnecessarily... But sometimes we may also become angry in the service of the Lord, not for personal interest. Just like Hanumānjī. Hanumānjī, he became very angry upon Rāvaṇa and he devastated his kingdom, which was known as golden kingdom of Rāvaṇa. So not for his personal interest. Arjuna also, he was nonviolent naturally because he's a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. But when Kṛṣṇa asked him to fight he became very much angry, because without being angry you cannot fight. You have to agitate your mind even artificially. Then you can fight. Therefore, when there is fight both the parties, they stood very strongly so that agitate themselves to become angry. This is the process.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

A kṣatriya is meant for fighting. A brāhmaṇa is meant for intelligent work. A vaiśya is meant for business. A śūdra is meant for labor. But because there is no such division, people are not trained from the very beginning. Therefore a śūdra is called by the draftboard, "Come on," to fight. Now, how he can fight? He is not a kṣatriya. So they are flying away. They're taking visa for another country and going away. How he can fight? He is not kṣatriya. So Kṛṣṇa said Arjuna that, "You are kṣatriya." He did not say... Kṛṣṇa wanted, Arjuna wanted to become a false brāhmaṇa. He said, "Oh, I shall become nonviolent, and even though I don't get my kingdom I shall beg like a brāhmaṇa and shall live away. Kṛṣṇa, don't ask me to fight." This is false brahmanism. "Oh," Kṛṣṇa said, "you are kṣatriya. You must fight." It cannot imitate a brāhmaṇa's business. This is false.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

We are publishing one book, Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. It has been taken by one great publisher, Macmillan Company, and we'll have it by the month of October. Don't interpret. We explain things as they are. That should be the attitude. Why? Why interpretation? By interpretation, there are 664 editions of Bhagavad-gītā. Simply by... One medical man he has interpreted Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa is a physician and Arjuna is a patient. And he has tried to explain through Bhagavad-gītā all anatomic physiology, not this. Gandhi, he wanted to prove nonviolence from Bhagavad-gītā. The Bhagavad-gītā is being spoken in the battlefield, full of violence, and he is trying to prove that the Bhagavad-gītā is nonviolent. These are all artificial attempts. These explanations will never give you the real light from Bhagavad-gītā. You try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is.

Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977:

So Nṛsiṁha-deva was very, very angry. Now the atheist class of men, who do not know what is the nature of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, they will say, "Why God should become angry?" So God, why He should not be angry? God must have everything; otherwise how He is God complete? Pūrṇam. The anger is also another quality of living symptom. The stone does not become angry because he's stone. But any living being, he becomes angry. That is a quality. And why God should not be angry? They imagine God; not they have got any factual conception of God. They imagine that "God must be like this. God must be nonviolent. God must be very peaceful." Why? Wherefrom the anger comes? It comes from God. Otherwise there is no existence of anger.

Lecture on SB 7.9.8 -- Hawaii, March 21, 1969:

Because Kṛṣṇa does not want it. I cannot utilize everything and anything for Kṛṣṇa which Kṛṣṇa does not like. Because you are Kṛṣṇa's servant, so you have to take permission from Kṛṣṇa, "Would You like this?" If He says, "Yes," yes, I can use that. If Kṛṣṇa says, "Yes, I will eat meat," oh, I shall kill all the animals and give Him, offer Him. But if Kṛṣṇa says, "No, I want fruits," then how can I give everything Him against His will? Is that devotion? Kṛṣṇa says, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati (BG 9.26). He says that "Fruits, flower, vegetables—anyone give Me with devotion, I eat." Therefore you have to do that. Everything, anything, does not mean that you will go against the will of Kṛṣṇa. Does it mean that? If Kṛṣṇa says, "You bring this," "Ah, never mind." Even though I do not like it, I shall do it. Just like Kṛṣṇa said that "You fight." Is fighting good? He was good man. He didn't want to fight. But Kṛṣṇa said, "You fight," so against his will he fought. That is anything and everything. From gentleman's point of view, from nonviolence point of view, Arjuna was very nice.

Lecture on SB 7.9.9 -- Mayapur, March 1, 1977:

So consciously, unconsciously, we are in such a position in this material world that we have to commit sinful activities even if we are very, very careful. You have seen the Jains, they are after nonviolence. You'll find they keep a cloth like this so that the small insects may not enter the mouth. But these are artificial. You cannot check. In the air there are so many living entities. In the water there are so many living entities. We drink water. You cannot check it. It is not possible. But if you keep yourself fixed up in devotional service, then you are not bound.

Yajñārthe karmaṇo 'nyatra loko 'yaṁ karma-bandhanaḥ (BG 3.9). If your life is dedicated for yajña, for serving Kṛṣṇa, then the inevitable sinful activities which we commit without any knowledge, we are not responsible. Manye mithe kṛtaṁ pāpaṁ puṇyaya eva kalpate (?). So our life should be dedicated simply for Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Then we are safe.

Lecture on SB 7.9.33 -- Mayapur, March 11, 1976:

When Caitanya Mahāprabhu was approached by Sanātana Gosvāmī, his first question was ke āmi: "Who am I?" This is the first education, spiritual education. And the same thing is taught in the Bhagavad-gītā because Arjuna was too much identifying himself in the bodily conception of life: "I belong to this Kurus' family, so if I kill them, then family will be ruined. The women will be widows, and they'll be corrupted. Then there will be unwanted children, varṇa-saṅkara, and in this way the whole world will be hellish," and so on, so on, so many, but beginning with the bodily conception of life. All, what was, Arjuna was explaining to Kṛṣṇa, that was... From material point of view, it is very nice. He wanted to become nonviolent. He did not like to kill his family members. He, rather, liked to forego his claim, that "I don't want. Let them enjoy." But everything, from material point of view, it was very nice proposal. But this identification with family, with nation, with community, this is all foolishness. All foolishness.

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 17, 1972:

That was Arjuna's decision, in the beginning. And thus Bhagavad-gītā was taught to him. But after teaching Bhagavad-gītā to Arjuna, Kṛṣṇa inquired from him, "Now what is your position? Your illusion is over or not? What you have decided to do now?" He said, "Yes, my illusion is over." Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava (BG 18.73). "What You are saying, I shall act." This is Bhagavad-gītā understanding. Sarva-dharmān parityaja mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. Then Arjuna went against his first decision. In the beginning he was nonviolent. But he changed. He become violent. Violent means he fought. He was a warrior. He was kṣatriya. His business was to fight when there is necessity. But in the beginning he was illusioned. Kārpaṇya-doṣo upahata-svabhāvaḥ (BG 2.7). Svabhāvaḥ, by nature, he was fighter, warrior, but kārpaṇya-doṣa, being miserly, upahata svabhāvaḥ, he's going, he was going against his nature. And after understanding Bhagavad-gītā, he was posed in his real nature.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 11, 1973:

The other party must be killed." He, first of all, he hesitated: "How can I kill my grandfather and nephews, my brothers, the other side? No, I cannot," when he was bodily conscious. But when he understood Kṛṣṇa's Bhagavad-gītā, he said, kariṣye vacanam: "Yes, I shall do it." That is ānukūla. That is ānukūla. In the beginning, he was becoming very good gentlemen, nonviolent, but Kṛṣṇa chastised him:

kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ
viṣame samupasthitam
anārya-juṣṭam asvargyam
akīrti-karam (arjuna)
(BG 2.2)

"Oh, you are proposing something which is the action of the anārya, not of the Aryans.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.76-81 -- San Francisco, February 2, 1967:

One doctor, Mr., Dr. Goshal, he is a medical college chemist. He analyzed this cow dung and found all antiseptic properties in cow dung. So this is Vedic injunction. Whatever is there, it is already tested, it is already experimented. You have simply to accept. Don't try to argue. This is acceptance of Vedānta-sūtra. Not that "Oh, I have got to serve some purpose, political purpose. So I'll have to prove from Bhagavad-gītā there is nonviolence." In our country, Gandhi, he was supposed to be a great student of Bhagavad-gītā. He wanted to prove that there... (break) ...by violence. So he was killed. How you can prove Bhagavad-gītā nonviolence? There is tacit order, "You must fight. The other party is impious. So you must fight." These are the injunction. You cannot change. That is not Vedānta-sūtra.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.109-114 -- San Francisco, February 20, 1967:

So when there is such doubt, one can interpret. But when there is no doubt—everyone can understand clearly the meaning—there is no question of interpreting. That is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's stressing, that gauṇa-vṛttye yebā bhāṣya karila ācārya. Therefore each and every aphorism and verse of Vedānta-sūtra has been indirectly interpreted by the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Such interpretation, if somebody hears, then his future is doomed. Just like our Gandhi, he wanted to prove, from Bhagavad-gītā, nonviolence. The Bhagavad-gītā is being preached in the battlefield, and it is completely violence. How he can prove? Therefore he is dragging the meaning out of his own con... It is very troublesome, and anyone who will read such interpretation, he is doomed. He is doomed because the Bhagavad-gītā is meant for awakening your Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If that is not awakened, then it is useless waste of time. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu embraced the brāhmaṇa who was illiterate, but he took the essence of Bhagavad-gītā, the relationship between the Lord and the devotee. Therefore, unless we take the real, I mean to say, essence of any literature, it is simply waste of time.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.109-114 -- San Francisco, February 20, 1967:

So in both the philosophies there is no acceptance of Lord, the Supreme Lord, Personality of Godhead. Therefore they are called nāstika-vāda. Nāstika-vāda means atheism, atheism. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has described Buddha religion as atheism. "And Māyāvāda philosophy," He has said, "dangerous atheism." He has given little preference to Buddhism, but to Māyāvāda philosophy He has stated, "It is dangerous atheism." His exact version is like that, bheda namiya bauddha haila nāstika. Vedāśraye nāstika-vāda bauddha ke adika. He says that "We call the Buddhists as atheists because the simple reason is that they do not accept Vedas." Lord Buddha, he denied, that "I don't care for the Vedas. I have got my this own proposition, that ahiṁsā. Nonviolence is the religion. That's all." So he did not accept Vedas. Therefore, those who are Vedantists, those who are followers of Vedas, they called Buddhist religion atheism. Atheism means anyone who does not believe in scriptures, standard scriptures. That is called atheism.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.101 -- Washington, D.C., July 6, 1976:

These things should be discussed. But still we got to work, why? Only for love. That is the only cause. I love my children, I love my wife, or I love my country, my society. Love is there. But this love is not giving me satisfaction. We are disappointed. As I, yesterday I cited the example of Mahatma Gandhi. For his country's love, he did so much. He wanted Hindu-Muslim unity, and he wanted nonviolence. In this way he was organizing. But the world is so ungrateful that instead of unity of Hindu-Muslim, in India we experienced complete partition, Hindustan and Pakistan. So he was baffled. And so far nonviolence was concerned, he was killed by violence. So he died very disappointed. So everyone... This is giving the best example, typical example. Everyone. We are attached to the love of this material world, but we are all disappointed.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.294-298 -- New York, December 19, 1966:

Therefore He comes here to find out some enemy. The two functions are served. Paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām (BG 4.8). He satisfies His fighting spirit; at the same time, He protects the devotees and protects that enemy also by killing him. Because when a demon is killed by the Supreme Lord, he is at once liberated. The liberation which he had to achieve after many, many births, he at once achieves. That is the advantage. So He saves the enemy and saves the devotee, and at the same time, He satisfies His fighting desire. So God is good. So any fight, that is also good. It is not that Kṛṣṇa is inducing, inciting Arjuna, fight. There is a plan, big plan. So foolish people who criticize, "Oh, Kṛṣṇa is inciting war. We are very good men, nonviolence." So this "good man" has no value. That fighting has much value. But there is a plan, good plan. So this is called pastime, līlā, līlāvatāra.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.40-50 -- San Francisco, January 24, 1967:

This is the secret of modern fashionable interpretation. If you want to establish... Suppose you have got some conviction, and if you want to establish it by evidence of an approved literature... An approved literature. Just like Gandhi. Gandhi wanted to establish nonviolence from Bhagavad-gītā. He was a... He is known to be a great student of Bhagavad-gītā, but he was not at all. His political theory was that he wanted to conquer over the enemies by nonviolence method. Nonviolent noncooperation, that was his, I mean to say, theory. He wanted to get away all kinds of nonviolence from the world, all kinds of violence from the world. So he wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gītā nonviolence. But how you can prove nonviolence from Bhagavad-gītā? Because Bhagavad-gītā is being spoken in the violent battlefield. But because he wanted to prove nonviolence, therefore he says, "Oh, these Pāṇḍavas means this. This Kṛṣṇa means this. This chariot means this. These Kurus means this. Dharmakṣetra means this. Kurukṣetra means this." He has invented and manufactured so many rascal meaning that it is very difficult... He said that dharmakṣetre... In the beginning of Bhagavad-gītā there is the verse, dharmakṣetre kurukṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ (BG 1.1). Now the very word yuyutsavaḥ means persons who are desiring to fight with one another. Now, how you can prove nonviolence? But he extracts some meaning: "These Pāṇḍava means five senses and the Kurukṣetra means this body." In this way, his interpretation.

Festival Lectures

Ratha-yatra -- Philadelphia, July 12, 1975:

So our only request is, with folded hands and begging you, so many flatterings, we simply request... Dante nidhāya tṛṇakaṁ pādayor nipatya. This is our process. We are not very violent pushing. Now, you see our procession came, so many, for three hours. There was no violence. And the police department of your country, they very much appreciate because they have got experience whenever there is some procession, there is violence. "Window-breaking crowd," they say. But these people are not win-breaking crowd. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement... You have already accepted it, this movement, your so many young men. So we request. This is another occasion to invite you. So our only request is that you chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, and you will feel very much happy. There will be no anxiety. And then you can do your work. It doesn't matter what you are doing. But chanting of this Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra will make you more and more happy, free from material anxieties, and if we continue this process, then everything will be clearly understood about spiritual life, and very easily we shall be able to go back to home, back to Godhead.

Varaha-dvadasi, Lord Varaha's Appearance Day Lecture Dasavatara-stotra Purport -- Los Angeles, February 18, 1970:

So these things were going on. In the name of Vedic sacrifice, they were killing animals like anything. So Lord became very much compassionate these poor animals, and He appeared as Lord Buddha, and His philosophy was nonviolence. His philosophy was atheist because He said that "There is no God. This combination of matter is a manifestation, and you dismantle the material elements, there will be void and there will be no sense of pleasure and pain. That is the nirvāṇa, ultimate goal of life." That was His philosophy. But actually His mission was to stop animal killing, to stop the men from so much sinful activities. So Lord Buddha is also prayed herewith. So people will be surprised that Lord Buddha is designated as atheist and still the Vaiṣṇavas, they are offering their respectful prayers to Lord Viṣṇu (Buddha). Why? Because the Vaiṣṇava knows how the God is acting for His different purposes. Others, they do not know.

Initiation Lectures

Brahmana Initiation Lecture -- New Vrindaban, May 25, 1969:

I want to introduce nonviolence, no animal killing. So even there is Veda, prescription, I don't accept Vedas." Therefore he became nāstika. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that veda nā māniyā bauddha haila nāstika: "Because Lord Buddha did not accept the authority of the Veda, therefore he was considered nāstika, atheist." He was Indian. He was Hindu. His forefathers were kṣatriyas, Vedic. He revolted. So therefore he was called nāstika. But a brāhmaṇa should not be nāstika; he should be āstik. Āstikyam: "He must believe in the scriptural injunction." These are brahminical qualifications.

Sannyasa Initiation Lecture -- Calcutta, January 26, 1973:

So anāśritaḥ, without taking shelter of the result of activities, kāryaṁ karma karo... "It is my duty." Just like Arjuna did. Arjuna understood that Kṛṣṇa wanted the fight. He took it, kāryam, that "I, this, this, I must do. This I must do. Kṛṣṇa wants it. Because my business is to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. I cannot become nonviolent as I wanted to become falsely, 'Kṛṣṇa, I don't want to fight with my cousin-brothers, my nephews, my grandfather.' That was my sense gratification." Kṛṣṇa immediately said, "What kind of nonsense you are talking, that you won't fight, won't fight? This is not good." Kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ viṣame... "What kind of nonsense you are speaking? You have come to fight in the battlefield, and now you are talking that nonviolence. So don't talk all this nonsense because you are My friend, My cousin-brother. It does not look well." Anārya-juṣṭam asvargyam akīrti-karam. (BG 2.2) "These things are done by the anaryas, not by a gentleman." Anārya-juṣṭam akīrti-karam. "You, this, this will be infamous for you. Don't do like that." Then He explained to him Bhagavad-gītā. And when he understood, then he took sannyāsa. What is that sannyāsa? Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava (BG 18.73) "Yes, I'll fight." That's all.

General Lectures

Lecture -- San Francisco, April 2, 1968:

The first thing is what you are or what I am. In the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra this perplexed question was there before Arjuna. Arjuna was to fight with his brothers and relatives on the other side to decide who shall be the emperor of the region. So in the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, when he actually came in front of his relatives, he decided that "It is no good fighting with my relatives and taking the kingdom. Better I shall beg. I don't want this kingdom." That is a very nice proposal, nonviolence, not to fight. But on this point the Bhagavad-gītā, or the science of God, developed from the lips of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 4, 1968:

We are in such a position that in every step there is sinful activity, every step. This world is so made. Just like nonviolence. Nonviolence, the Buddhist philosophy, the Jain philosophy, they advocate nonviolence. But how one can be nonviolent? We are walking on the street, there are so many ants and small germs, they are being killed. We are breathing, so many animals are being killed. We are drinking water, so many animals are being killed. How it is possible to become nonviolence? It is not possible. Therefore in every step we have to act in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, or God consciousness. Then there is indemnity from the sinful activities. That is recommended in the Bhagavad-gītā, that yajñarthāt karmaṇo 'nyatra loko 'yaṁ karma-bandhanaḥ (BG 3.9). Unless you act in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, or God consciousness, or as ordered by Kṛṣṇa, or God, then you become bound up by the reaction.

Lecture -- Hawaii, March 23, 1969:

So our proposition is not that vegetarian-nonvegetarian. Vegetarian or nonvegetarian, it is not very important thing. Vegetable has got also life. It does not mean that one man is eating meat; therefore he is killing. But even vegetarians, they are also killing. But our process is... We... Killing is not very important or nonimportant for us. If Kṛṣṇa says, "Kill," we can kill. If Kṛṣṇa says, "Don't kill," we don't kill. Because we are simply order-carrier. Just like Arjuna. Arjuna was posing himself by his family relationship that he's very perfect, nonviolent gentleman. But Kṛṣṇa induced him to fight, to kill the other party. So for us, killing or nonkilling is not very important thing because everyone is killing, knowingly or unknowingly. So our point is we take foodstuff offered to Kṛṣṇa, and whatever Kṛṣṇa eats, that is our foodstuff. We distribute that thing.

(reading:) "Does ISKCON believe in reincarnation?" Well, this, there is no question of belief. It is a fact.

Lecture Engagement and Prasada Distribution -- Boston, April 26, 1969:

We are eating the grains and fruits. They have got also life. It is not that those who are vegetarians, or eating grains and fruit, they are not eating life. They are also eating life. But the bhakti-yoga process is that, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, that the devotees, they take prasādam. We have got arrangement of distributing prasādam in every Sunday. Prasādam means the foodstuff which is offered to Kṛṣṇa and then you take. So what Kṛṣṇa wants, that is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati (BG 9.26). Therefore we are not propagating the philosophy of ahiṁsā, or nonviolence, because in some way or other, there is violence, either you take fruit or grain or animal. But the principle is that you have to take prasādam, the foodstuff which is offered to Kṛṣṇa, and then eat. So these things, fruits, grains, are accepted by Kṛṣṇa. We offer to Kṛṣṇa and then eat them. This is the philosophy.

Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:

What is that quality of prasannātmā? Na śocati na kāṅkṣati (BG 18.54). There is no hankering and there is no lamentation. So long we have got this bodily identification, we have got sense gratification. What we haven't got for sense gratification, we hanker after it. And if we lose something, then also we lament. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na.... But a brahma-bhūtaḥ person, he has no hankering, no lamenting. Samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. Then he sees equally everyone. Paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ (BG 5.18). Not that "He is animal. He should be sent to the slaughterhouse for our eating purpose, and the animal may suffer and we may enjoy." This is not Brahman realization. Samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. Equal: "Oh, if somebody pinches me, I suffer." Lord Buddha preached this Brahman realization, that if you suffer by others' pinching, why should you pinch others? Nonviolence.

Lecture to International Student Society -- Boston, December 28, 1969:

These instructions, these directions are there in the Vedic literatures. If somebody, it is said if somebody kidnaps your wife, if somebody sets fire in your house, somebody comes to kill you, then he is understood as aggressor and you can kill him immediately. There is no question of nonviolence. These are śāstric instructions. All right. So I think we can chant again. You can join.

Lecture (Day after Lord Rama's Appearance Day) -- Los Angeles, April 16, 1970:

Therefore it is stated, sadaya-hṛdaya-darśita-paśu-ghātam: "My dear Lord, You have appeared as Lord Buddha, just being compassionate to the poor animals." Lord Buddha preached ahiṁsā paramo dharmaḥ: "The best religious principle is to become nonviolent." He preached this philosophy, that "If somebody hurts you, you feel pain, then why should you kill other animal and put it into painful condition? So don't do these sinful activities." That was his main principle of philosophy that he preached. He was Hindu, kṣatriya, Hindu prince, born in a kṣatriya family, and he was prince, a very luxurious life. So as young man, when he saw an old man and he is traveling, walking with great difficulty, he asked his servant, "What is this? Why this man is walking in this way?" He was explained that "This is old age, and in old age everyone has to become like this." So he at once left home and sat down in Gayapradesh, a province in Bihar in India. And he began to meditate how to make solution of this old age.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:
Prabhupāda: Therefore it depends on that social body, which is authority. So ultimately we have to depend on the authority for all sanctions. So our proposition is that the supreme authority is Kṛṣṇa. So whatever He sanctions, that is morality; whatever He does not sanction, that is immorality. Just like Arjuna was thinking to become nonviolent, not to fight, is good. But Kṛṣṇa said, "Now you fight." So fight became good. So ultimately it depends on Kṛṣṇa's will, what is morality, what is immorality, what is good, what is bad. Therefore our duty is, instead of depending on social body or political... (break) ...are so many, one is different from the other—we depend on the supreme will of the supreme authority.
Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Hayagrīva: there's only one good. That's God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That's a fact. You are thinking that this man is, so how he is good? He is limited in his power. He may think of his brother, of his nation, of his society but what does he do of other living beings? So how he can be good? A good man, speaking even a man like Gandhi, he is a good man, but when he was approached that stop cow killing, he could not do anything. Although he is advocating non-violence but he, the violence committing in the slaughterhouse, thousands and thousands of animals being killed, violence, what did he do? So how he is good man? Nobody can be good man.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, sammohāya sura-dviṣām (SB 1.3.24). Lord Buddha appeared at a time when people became atheistic, and especially they began to kill animals in the sacrifice in large quantity. So God, Lord Buddha, appeared, being sympathetic to the poor animals. Sadaya-hṛdaya darśita-paśu-ghātam. He was very, very much aggrieved to see the poor animals are being killed unnecessarily. So he preached the religion of nonviolence, and because the people became atheist, so Lord Buddha, just to take them under his control, he also collaborated and said, "Yes, there is no God, but you hear me." But he is incarnation of God, so it is a kind of transcendental cheating that in the beginning he said there is no God, but he is God himself, and people accepted his words or instruction. That is Buddhism. So this very word is used, sammohāya sura-dviṣām (SB 1.3.24). Sura-dviṣām, atheist class of men, are always against theist class of men. Therefore their name is that atheist means who are envious of devotees. So in order to cheat these persons who are envious of God or devotee, Lord Buddha appeared and established a system of religion on the platform of nonviolence—no more animal killing. Because those who are animal killers, they cannot understand God (indistinct). That is not possible. They may have some vague idea. So Lord Buddha wanted to stop these sinful activities, and he established the system of nonviolence.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: It is not a question of faith, it is a question of fact. Then it is, the same example, just like Arjuna. He decided to become nonviolent in the beginning, but at the end he decided to fight and kill. Now which is piety and which is sinful? Actually, this decision to kill by the order of Kṛṣṇa is piety, because he satisfies the higher authorities. So in this material world we concoct that "This is sinful, this is piety," but actual sinful and piety is decided on the order of the Supreme God. That is (indistinct). So if you have no connection with God, so our these thoughts of sinful and piety, they are simply mental concoction. It has no value.

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner:

Prabhupāda: Just like in the Western countries, the social (indistinct), the killing of animals—it is taken not bad. In other societies it is taken as bad. How is that? There are two contradictory societies. One society says that nonviolence is nice, better, but another society says no, violence is better. Then how will I (indistinct)? Which society is good, which society bad? How you will decide?

Devotee: He has no way of deciding.

Prabhupāda: No. There is no way. If you come to the Vedic life, then you will know.

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

Prabhupāda: That is a different thing. But in India all the authorities, all personalities, unless you accept Vedas, you are called nāstika. Therefore Buddha philosophy was driven away, Caitanya Mahāprabhu veda nā māniyā bauddha haila nāstika. Simply Lord Buddha says, "I don't care for your Vedas." Lord Buddha wanted to preach nonviolence, but in the Vedic literature there is violence. There is violence. Just like Gandhi wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gītā nonviolence. Where is nonviolence there? Where is that nonviolence? Kṛṣṇa is inducing Arjuna to fight, to become violent. So how can you prove there is nonviolence? These are all nonsense. So similarly, in the Vedas there is recommendation that animals can be sacrificed in the Vedas with mantra. That... Therefore the process, to test the power of the mantra, that animal is put into the fire and the animal again comes out with a new life. That is the test. Just like you test how the microphone is working. So how the Vedic mantras are being chanted rightly, that is tested by putting... Just like in laboratory a small animal is killed.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: That is actually doing. Actually in our experience also, just like a soldier, he kills by the order, superior order of the state. He is given gold medal. And if the same man, when he comes home, if he kills, he is hanged. Why? Because you can kill under superior order, not whimsically. Generally the order is not to kill, but if he says now kill, you can... that is order, that you have to take. And if you say at that time, "Sir, you told me not to kill," that is (indistinct). General order and specific order. So Kṛṣṇa says, amānitvam adambhitvam ahiṁsā kṣāntir ārjavam (BG 13.8). He is giving the process of knowledge, amānitvam adambhitvam, not to be proud, ahiṁsā, nonviolence. These are there, eighteen qualities for understanding spiritual values. So it is general. Now for particular purposes if Kṛṣṇa says, "Yes, you must kill," you must abide by that order. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Page Title:Nonviolence (Lectures)
Compiler:Rishab, Mayapur
Created:22 of May, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=115, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:115