View source for This is also material world. Even in this material world we are so much dependent on the rules and regulation of the nature. And what to speak of going to the spiritual world

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"This is also material world. Even in this material world we are so much dependent on the rules and regulation of the nature. And what to speak of going to the spiritual world"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Serene}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|10Feb13}}
{{last|10Feb13}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:This Is The Material World]]
[[Category:Even In]]
[[Category:We Are]]
[[Category:Depend On]]
[[Category:Rules and Regulations]]
[[Category:Nature]]
[[Category:What to Speak Of]]
[[Category:Go To The Spiritual World]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="1" parent="Lectures" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures"><h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB3267BombayDecember191974_0" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="471" link="Lecture on SB 3.26.7 -- Bombay, December 19, 1974" link_text="Lecture on SB 3.26.7 -- Bombay, December 19, 1974">
<div class="heading">This is also material world. Even in this material world we are so much dependent on the rules and regulation of the nature. And what to speak of going to the spiritual world?
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 3.26.7 -- Bombay, December 19, 1974|Lecture on SB 3.26.7 -- Bombay, December 19, 1974]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Dictated by the material nature, we are acting in some way and thereby creating another resultant action, means another body. In this way it is going on. That is called saṁsṛtiḥ. Tad asya saṁsṛtir bandhaḥ pāra-tantryam. Svātantrya, and just the opposite word is pāra-tantrya, under the direction of somebody else, pāra-tantrya. Just like dog and the master. The dog is pāra-tantrya, dependent on the master. Similarly, we are now dogs of material nature, pāra-tantrya. We cannot go beyond the rules and regulation, condition, of material nature. That is called pāra-tantrya, not svātantrya. Just like they are trying to go to the moon planet, but because they are under condition of material nature, not that they can go very easily. It is not possible. They are coming back again and again trying to go there. This is also material world. Even in this material world we are so much dependent on the rules and regulation of the nature. And what to speak of going to the spiritual world? Pāra-tantrya is there. We admit or not admit. We are not svātantrya, or independent. We are dependent. Bhavaty akartur īśasya sākṣiṇo nirvṛtātmanaḥ.</p>
<p>So we are conditioned soul, but the Supersoul... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not admit the existence of Supersoul. They think there is one soul. We are... They speak of our conditioned life as līlā. This is not very good philosophy. One has got the body of a hog, and he is eating stool, and the Māyāvādī philosopher says that it is līlā. God is eating stool; it is līlā. Just see the philosophy! Because we say kṛṣṇa-līlā... Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He is dancing with the gopīs or playing with the cowherds boy or becoming the child of mother Yaśodā. We say it is līlā. The Māyāvādī philosopher says... Because they do not two, make two. Their philosophy is one. So the pig or the hog eating the stool, they say it is also līlā. Kṛṣṇa is dancing with the gopīs, that is also līlā, and because they do not make two, therefore... We cannot say, of course. They say that God is also, has become pig and they, eating stool, that is also līlā. This is the grossest offense on the feet of the Lord, to bring Him to the status of ordinary living being who is not independent. Dependent, it is clearly said. Therefore they manufacture these words, "daridra-nārāyaṇa," "this Nārāyaṇa," "that Nārāyaṇa," because they do not make any difference between Nārāyaṇa and the ordinary living entity. This is their philosophy.</p>
<p>But that is not the fact. Here it is said, tad asya saṁsṛtir bandhaḥ pāra-tantryaṁ ca tat-kṛtam. Pāra-tantrya, under the grip of the laws of material nature. How God can be under the grip of material nature? They explain, "It is līlā." But that is not. Here it is said, pāra-tantrya: "He is forced to accept a certain type of body." That is called pāra-tantrya. Saṁsṛtiḥ. This is punishment, saṁsṛtiḥ. Why saṁsṛtiḥ? On account of... (aside:) What is that? Sit down. Saṁsṛtiḥ. Saṁsṛtiḥ means punishment. Samyak rūpeṇa sṛtiḥ, going, progress, one after another, one after another, one after another, saṁsṛtiḥ, saṁsāra. So saṁsāra is not very palatable thing. Our Vaiṣṇava ācāryas say that saṁsāra is just like blazing fire. It is not a very nice... Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, duḥkhālayam aśāśvatam ([[Vanisource:BG 8.15|BG 8.15]]). So does it mean that the Supreme Lord, the Absolute Personality of Godhead, He has come to suffer? And by force everyone in this material world is suffering saṁsṛtiḥ, and he is the Supreme Personality of Godhead? How wrong philosophy it is.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>