Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Wrongly conclude

Srimad-Bhagavatam

SB Canto 2

The Lord is not approachable by everyone because He is curtained by His yogamāyā potency. But one should not wrongly conclude that the Lord was formerly unmanifested and has now manifested Himself in the human form.
SB 2.5.20, Purport:

In the Bhagavad-gītā (7.24-25) the Lord has declared very clearly that the impersonalist, who gives more importance to the transcendental rays of the Lord as brahmajyoti and who concludes that the Absolute Truth is ultimately impersonal and only manifests a form at a time of necessity, is less intelligent than the personalist, however much the impersonalist may be engaged in studying the Vedānta. The fact is that such impersonalists are covered by the above-mentioned three modes of material nature; therefore, they are unable to approach the transcendental Personality of the Lord. The Lord is not approachable by everyone because He is curtained by His yogamāyā potency. But one should not wrongly conclude that the Lord was formerly unmanifested and has now manifested Himself in the human form. This misconception of the formlessness of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is due to the yogamāyā curtain of the Lord and can be removed only by the Supreme Will, as soon as the conditioned soul surrenders unto Him. The devotees of the Lord who are transcendental to the above-mentioned three modes of material nature can see the all-blissful transcendental form of the Lord with their vision of love in the attitude of pure devotional service.

While the impersonalist wrongly concludes that he is the Lord himself, the personalist, out of a great gratitude, worships the Lord in devotional service, knowing perfectly well that nothing is different from the Lord.
SB 2.6.23, Purport:

The impersonalists argue that there is no use in worshiping the Lord when everything is nothing but the Lord Himself. The personalist, however, worships the Lord out of a great sense of gratitude, utilizing the ingredients born out of the bodily limbs of the Lord. The fruits and flowers are available from the body of the earth, and yet mother earth is worshiped by the sensible devotee with ingredients born from the earth. Similarly, mother Ganges is worshiped by the water of the Ganges, and yet the worshiper enjoys the result of such worship. Worship of the Lord is also performed by the ingredients born from the bodily limbs of the Lord, and yet the worshiper, who is himself a part of the Lord, achieves the result of devotional service to the Lord. While the impersonalist wrongly concludes that he is the Lord himself, the personalist, out of a great gratitude, worships the Lord in devotional service, knowing perfectly well that nothing is different from the Lord. The devotee therefore endeavors to apply everything in the service of the Lord because he knows that everything is the property of the Lord and that no one can claim anything as one's own. This perfect conception of oneness helps the worshiper in being engaged in His loving service, whereas the impersonalist, being falsely puffed up, remains a nondevotee forever, without being recognized by the Lord.

SB Canto 7

Hariḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. This statement is sometimes misunderstood by unscrupulous persons who wrongly conclude that because Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is situated in every living entity, every living entity is therefore Hari. Such foolish persons do not distinguish between the ātmā and the Paramātmā, who are situated in every body.
SB 7.7.32, Purport:

Hariḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. This statement is sometimes misunderstood by unscrupulous persons who wrongly conclude that because Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is situated in every living entity, every living entity is therefore Hari. Such foolish persons do not distinguish between the ātmā and the Paramātmā, who are situated in every body. The ātma is the living entity, and the Paramātmā is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The individual living entity, however, is different from the Paramātmā, the Supreme Lord. Therefore hariḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu means that Hari is situated as Paramātmā, not as ātmā, although ātmā is a part of Paramātmā. Offering respect to every living entity means offering respect to the Paramātmā situated in every living entity. One should not misunderstand every living entity to be the Paramātmā. Sometimes unscrupulous persons designate a living entity as daridra-nārāyaṇa, svāmī-nārāyaṇa, this Nārāyaṇa or that Nārāyaṇa. One should clearly understand that although Nārāyaṇa is situated in the core of the heart of every living entity, the living entity never becomes Nārāyaṇa.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Adi-lila

By putting forward mundane logic one frequently comes to the wrong conclusion regarding the Absolute Truth.
CC Adi 8.15, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments in this connection that people in general, in their narrow-minded conception of life, create many different types of humanitarian activities, but the humanitarian activities inaugurated by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu are different. For logicians who want to accept only that which is proven through logic and argument, it is a fact that without logic and reason there can be no question of accepting the Absolute Truth. Unfortunately, when such logicians take to this path without the mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, they remain on the platform of logic and argument and do not advance in spiritual life. However, if one is intelligent enough to apply his arguments and logic to the subtle understanding of the fundamental spiritual substance, he will be able to know that a poor fund of knowledge established on the basis of material logic cannot help one understand the Absolute Truth, which is beyond the reach of imperfect senses. The Mahābhārata therefore says, acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet. (Mahābhārata, Bhīṣma-parva 5.22) How can that which is beyond the imagination or sensory speculation of mundane creatures be approached simply by logic? Logic and argument are very poor in spiritual strength and always imperfect when applied to spiritual understanding. By putting forward mundane logic one frequently comes to the wrong conclusion regarding the Absolute Truth, and as a result of such a conclusion one may fall down to accept a body like that of a jackal.

Other Books by Srila Prabhupada

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Sāṅkhya philosophers, metaphysicians or materialistic scientists who study this cosmic manifestation by their invented scientific method wrongly conclude that the reactions of the material elements are the original cause of creation.
Krsna Book 87:

One class of philosophers, known as Mīmāṁsakas, represented by sages such as Jaimini, have concluded that everyone should engage in pious activities or prescribed duties and that such activities will lead one to the highest perfection. But this is contradicted in the Ninth Chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā, where Lord Kṛṣṇa says that by pious activities one may be elevated to the heavenly planets, but that as soon as one’s accumulation of pious activities is used up, one has to leave the enjoyment of a higher standard of material prosperity in the heavenly planets and immediately come down again to these lower planets, where the duration of life is very short and where the standard of material happiness is of a lower grade. The exact words used in the Bhagavad-gītā are kṣīṇe puṇye martya-lokaṁ viśanti (BG 9.21). Therefore the conclusion of the Mīmāṁsaka philosophers that pious activities will lead one to the Absolute Truth is not valid. Although a pure devotee is by nature inclined to perform pious activities, no one can attain the favor of the Supreme Personality of Godhead by pious activities alone. Pious activities may purify one of the contamination caused by ignorance and passion, but this purification is automatically attained by a devotee constantly engaged in hearing the transcendental message of Godhead in the form of the Bhagavad-gītā, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam or similar scriptures. From the Bhagavad-gītā we understand that even a person who is not up to the standard of pious activities but who is absolutely engaged in devotional service is to be considered well situated on the path of spiritual perfection. It is also said in the Bhagavad-gītā that a person who is engaged in devotional service with love and faith is guided from within by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The Lord Himself as Paramātmā, or the spiritual master sitting within one’s heart, gives the devotee exact directions by which he can gradually go back to Godhead. The conclusion of the Mīmāṁsaka philosophers is not actually the truth which can lead one to real understanding.

Similarly, there are Sāṅkhya philosophers, metaphysicians or materialistic scientists who study this cosmic manifestation by their invented scientific method and do not recognize the supreme authority of God as the creator of the cosmic manifestation. They wrongly conclude that the reactions of the material elements are the original cause of creation. The Bhagavad-gītā, however, does not accept this theory. It is clearly said therein that behind the cosmic activities is the direction of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This fact is corroborated by the Vedic injunction sad vā saumyedam agra āsīt, which means that the origin of the creation existed before the cosmic manifestation. Therefore, the material elements cannot be the cause of the material creation. Although the material elements are accepted as immediate causes, the ultimate cause is the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. The Bhagavad-gītā says, therefore, that material nature works under the direction of Kṛṣṇa.

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Kṛṣṇa is life. He's not dead stone. Therefore the conclusion is: from life, life has come and matter has come. Not that matter has come from life. Oh, what is that? Life has come from matter. That is not the conclusion. That is wrong conclusion.
Lecture on BG 7.9-10 -- Bombay, February 24, 1974:

Bījo 'haṁ sarva-bhūtānām. (Bg 7.10) Here Kṛṣṇa says, bījo 'haṁ sarva-bhūtānām. Is there any chemist? Just get one small seed like the fig seed. It is very small, but it contains that big tree. Where is that chemistry? Where is that physics? So here is the answer, Kṛṣṇa says, bījaṁ māṁ sarva-bhūtānāṁ viddhi. Big, even this big, gigantic universe, that is also bījaṁ māṁ sarva-bhūtānām. It is stated in the Vedic literature. Yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya jīvanti loma-vilajā jagad-aṇḍa-nāthāḥ (Bs. 5.48). There are so many things. Everyone is inquisitive, "Where is the beginning of this thing?" The beginning is the Supreme Lord. That is the Vedānta-sūtra, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Beginning is there. So you cannot say that life has come from matter. That is not possible. Because here it is said, Kṛṣṇa says, that bījaṁ māṁ sarva-bhūtānām. Anything which has come into existence, the original source is Kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa is life. He's not dead stone. Therefore the conclusion is: from life, life has come and matter has come. Not that matter has come from life. Oh, what is that? Life has come from matter. That is not the conclusion. That is wrong conclusion.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

If you think, "Here is marble statue, and if I commit some offense, who is going to see?" this is wrong conclusion.
Lecture on SB 3.28.18 -- Nairobi, October 27, 1975:

When in the śāstra it is said that God has no form, it means that He has no material form. He has form; otherwise how can I think of His form? This Kṛṣṇa's form is not like us. Just like if you take my statue or any other statue and if you pray or if you offer food, that does not go actually to the person. But Kṛṣṇa's His aṅga, His form, is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa. Foolish people may say that "These men, they are offering food to a marble statue. Everyone knows." No. It is not the fact. The fact is Kṛṣṇa is omnipotent. He can accept your service, becoming a marble statue. Because I cannot see Kṛṣṇa by my present eyes, therefore He has appeared before you just like a marble statue. But He is not marble statue. We must know that. If you think, "Here is marble statue, and if I commit some offense, who is going to see?" this is wrong conclusion. He is, Kṛṣṇa, personally present here in a form which we can see. It is His mercy. It is called arcā-vigraha. Kṛṣṇa is everything. This marble is also Kṛṣṇa's energy. Bhūmir āpo'nalo vāyuḥ (BG 7.4).

When it is creation by the Supreme Lord, it is not that the brāhmaṇas are to be found only in India. That is another wrong conclusion.
Lecture on SB 6.1.41-42 -- Surat, December 23, 1970:

So when it is creation by the Supreme Lord, it is not that the brāhmaṇas are to be found only in India. That is another wrong conclusion. Because brāhmaṇas means representation of the quality of goodness. Anywhere you find the quality of goodness, that is brahmanism. So these American, European boys, when they have developed their quality of goodness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they are brāhmaṇas. If they are considered as mlecchas and yavanas, that is nārakīya-buddhi, hellish consideration. Vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhiḥ. If anyone considers a Vaiṣṇava, a devotee of the Lord, in the categorical estimation of birth, then that is hellish consideration.

You see. Not hearing attentively, sometimes wrong conclusion is made.
Lecture on SB 6.1.56-62 -- Surat, January 3, 1971, at Adubhai Patel's House:

Guest (1): In the Rāmāyaṇa it told that how we should hear actual life, and Rāmāyaṇa told actual that, in that grantha, how we should live. And if you are saying Rāma to be asura, how we are...

Prabhupāda: Rāma was asura?

Guest (1): No, you told that.

Prabhupāda: Rāvaṇa was asura.

Devotees: Rāvaṇa.

Prabhupāda: (laughter) Oh, you have become asura. You do not hear properly? You have become asura. It is God saved you that you questioned. Otherwise you would have gone like asura. You do attentively hear. Don't speak like asura.

Haṁsadūta: Starting with chanting.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That happens, you see. Not hearing attentively, sometimes wrong conclusion is made.

Conversations and Morning Walks

1975 Conversations and Morning Walks

If they simply follow strictly this moon expedition and they admit they have not gone, then the whole civilization will change. All wrong conclusion.
Morning Walk -- May 16, 1975, Perth:

Prabhupāda: This "Sunday, Monday," means first sun, then moon. Where they are going? They are going to hell, not in the moon. This Vedic description is right. Because first study, Sunday... That, we offer gāyatrī to the sun. So the moon is after the sun—this is the proof, first Sunday, then Monday. So if their calculation is 93,000,000 miles from here, and moon is (sic:) one million, six thousand still farther, then where they are going? If they simply follow strictly this moon expedition and they admit they have not gone, then the whole civilization will change. All wrong conclusion. But they will have to admit now. Now they are serious, and they will have to say that they've never gone to the moon. And they will have to continue this. Otherwise they will be farce before the world. They will have to continue it. Now they are in such a position.

Correspondence

1971 Correspondence

All translations should be checked by you and Candrabali because those who are not our students, if they write some wrong conclusion, the whole thing will be murdered.
Letter to Citsukhananda -- Nairobi 12 October, 1971:

One thing is that all translations should be checked by you and Candrabali because those who are not our students, if they write some wrong conclusion, the whole thing will be murdered.

1972 Correspondence

It is better not to draw any wrong conclusions from so little evidence.
Letter to Tusta Krsna -- Los Angeles 24 August, 1972:

Yes, Karandhara said that Sriman Siddha Svarupa Ananda is not up to the point of our preaching work, especially when the "Sai Speaks" booklet was distributed there was some discrepancy from our standard. So when this complaint was lodged I called him here and I asked him to stay with me for some time. When I went to London I made arrangement that Siddha Svarupa Ananda Maharaja would speak in the sanctuary of Los Angeles Temple and this was settled up and he remained here in Los Angeles when I went to London. After coming back I understood that he left immediately when I left for London. I have received no letter from him. So there is no misunderstanding, but I want to keep him with me for some time, so if you have got his address you can ask him to come to me and live with me again for some time. It is better not to draw any wrong conclusions from so little evidence, actually he is very sincere soul and everyone knows it and I like him very much and so does Karandhara, so you need not worry in this connection.

Page Title:Wrongly conclude
Compiler:Labangalatika, Erick
Created:25 of Aug, 2009
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=3, CC=1, OB=1, Lec=4, Con=1, Let=2
No. of Quotes:12