View source for We are delivering speeches from authoritative book, Bhagavad-gita. I am not speaking before you of my own imagination. I am speaking from the authorized book

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"we are delivering speeches from authoritative book, Bhagavad-gita. I am not speaking before you of my own imagination. I am speaking from the authorized book"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Visnu Murti}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|18Nov10}}
{{last|18Nov10}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:I Am (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:Deliver]]
[[Category:Speech]]
[[Category:from]]
[[Category:Authoritative]]
[[Category:Books]]
[[Category:Bhagavad-gita]]
[[Category:I Am Not (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:Speak]]
[[Category:My (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:Own]]
[[Category:Imagination]]
[[Category:Authorized]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="General_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="11" parent="Lectures" text="General Lectures"><h3>General Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonMahamantraNewYorkSeptember81966_0" class="quote" parent="General_Lectures" book="Lec" index="2" link="Lecture on Maha-mantra -- New York, September 8, 1966" link_text="Lecture on Maha-mantra -- New York, September 8, 1966">
<div class="heading">We are delivering speeches from authoritative book, Bhagavad-gītā. I am not speaking before you of my own imagination. I am speaking from the authorized book. Therefore it is not exactly pravacana, neither I am squeezing out some meaning for my purpose. I am just presenting you the same principle.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on Maha-mantra -- New York, September 8, 1966|Lecture on Maha-mantra -- New York, September 8, 1966]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So this transcendental sound, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare, you don't think that I have come here—it is my personal manufacture. No. It is not. No. It is not my personal manufacture. It is authorized just like the post box is authorized, because all previous ācāryas, all previous authorized persons in this line, they have done it. Just like see Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He is chanting and dancing, chanting and dancing, you see, the same thing. This picture is before you so that gradually, when you feel ecstasy, you will also dance like Him. And when you automatically dance, then you will know that the thing is already realized. Not artificially, but when you feel, "Oh, let me dance. It is so much ecstatic. Let me dance." Nothing should be done artificially. Let everything come automatically. And only we have to follow. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 17.186|CC Madhya 17.186]]). Dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. This is a verse from scripture, that tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ, if you simply go on arguing about spiritual matters—"This is not, this is not, this is not, yes, this is not..." I say something; you say something. No, no, no. You cannot realize spiritual objects simply by this speculation, argument. Our argument or logical, I mean to say, strength has no access in the spiritual world. The Vedic mantra says, nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyo na medhayā na bahunā śrutena: "Atma, the supreme self, cannot be realized pravacanena." Suppose I am very expert speaker, I can present things very nicely—but without any substance. Oh, that won't help you. Simply by jugglery of words, if I can captivate you, oh, that won't help you. Nāyam ātmā pravacanena. This is pravacana.</p>
<p>Of course, we are delivering speeches from authoritative book, Bhagavad-gītā. I am not speaking before you of my own imagination. I am speaking from the authorized book. Therefore it is not exactly pravacana, neither I am squeezing out some meaning for my purpose. I am just presenting you the same principle. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 17.186|CC Madhya 17.186]]). As Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu preached, I am trying to present the same thing before you in a different language only. That's all. Because in India He preached in Sanskrit. He was a very learned scholar in Sanskrit. Formerly, any big man, any big scholar, they would be big scholar in Sanskrit. Sanskrit was the written language. Even in the beginning of the British period, Sanskrit was written language. It is the policy of Lord McCauley that he transformed the whole attitude. They made a plan that "If Indians remain as Indian, then we cannot rule over. Then we cannot rule over. We must make them Anglicized." So that policy was followed for two hundred years, so India has lost its original culture. So therefore the original point is that tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ. We cannot realize the Supreme Truth simply by argument or logical presentation or philosophical speculation. No. Tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 17.186|CC Madhya 17.186]]). Śrutayo means scriptures. Now say, for example, Bhagavad-gītā and your Bible and the Muhammadans, they'll present Koran. So of course, this Bhagavad-gītā is little different from Vedic scripture. That we have already explained. It is an independent something, universal. So Vedic scripture, Koran, Bible, or Zoroastrian... There are so many religions, Buddhist religion, so many. So there may be some difference of opinion. Śrutayor vibhinnā. Vibhinnā means different. Now, you cannot realize the Absolute Truth simply by your mundane arguments and by your logical strength, neither you can catch up the right thing by reading different scriptures. Śrutayor vibhinnā. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. And if you follow great philosophers, great thinkers, then also you will find one thinker is different from another thinker, one philosopher is differing from another philosopher. So whom to follow? This philosopher says that God is a person; another philosopher says God is imperson; another philosopher says that God is everywhere and there is no separate existence of God. So many philosophies there are in the world. And one person is not actually philosopher if he does not differ from other philosophers. That is the philosophical basic principle. You are a philosopher. If I cannot make your philosophical conclusion null and void and make my philosophy established, then I am not a philosopher. You see? That is the way, going on. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam: "He is not a philosopher if he cannot present a separate theory." He is not a philosopher.</p>
<p>Then how to catch up the Absolute Truth? What is the way? Now, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām: "Therefore the Absolute Truth is concealed within your heart." Nihitaṁ guhāyām. Now, mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ: ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 17.186|CC Madhya 17.186]]) "You just try to follow the great personalities, what they are doing, what they are doing." Now, about this mahājana, there is also difference of opinion who is mahājana. But so far our Vedic culture is concerned, there are specific mention, mahājana. And so far Lord Kṛṣṇa is concerned, so there is no two opinions about His authority throughout the whole world. And so far we are concerned, Hindus, or the followers of the Vedic religion, there is no difference of opinion so far Kṛṣṇa's authority is concerned.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>