View source for As soon as we see that he is not a devotee of Krsna, then he's a rascal. How do we say? He is not my enemy, but we have to say because it is stated by Krsna

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"As soon as we see that he is not a devotee of Krsna, then he's a rascal. How do we say? He is not my enemy, but we have to say because it is stated by Krsna"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Krsnadas}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|22Jun12}}
{{last|22Jun12}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:As Soon As We... (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:Our Seeing (Disciples of SP)]]
[[category:I See (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:is Not]]
[[Category:Krsna's Devotees]]
[[Category:Krsna and Rascals]]
[[Category:We Say (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:I Say (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:My (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:Our (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:enemy]]
[[Category:We Have To (Disciples of SP)]]
[[category:I Have To (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:because]]
[[Category:It Is Stated]]
[[Category:Krsna's Statements]]
[[Category:Questions Posed by Srila Prabhupada]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="0" parent="Lectures" text="Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures"><h3>Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG120LondonJuly171973_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="13" link="Lecture on BG 1.20 -- London, July 17, 1973" link_text="Lecture on BG 1.20 -- London, July 17, 1973">
<div class="heading">Bhāgavata says, that anyone who is not a devotee, who never chants the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, he may be very great man in the estimation of rascals, but he is nothing but an animal. Śva-viḍ-varāha-uṣṭra-kharaiḥ. "So how you can say such a great man. You are saying that animal." Our business is very thankless task. We say any man who is not a devotee, he is rascal. We say generally. It is very harsh word, but we have to use it. As soon as we see that he is not a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, then he's a rascal. How do we say? He is not my enemy, but we have to say because it is stated by Kṛṣṇa.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 1.20 -- London, July 17, 1973|Lecture on BG 1.20 -- London, July 17, 1973]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Pradyumna (leads chanting, etc.):</p>
:atha vyavasthitān dṛṣṭvā
:dhārtarāṣṭrān kapi-dhvajaḥ
:pravṛtte śastra-sampāte
:dhanur udyamya pāṇḍavaḥ
:hṛṣīkeśaṁ tadā vākyam
:idam āha mahī-pate
:([[Vanisource:BG 1.20 (1972)|BG 1.20]])
<p>Translation: "O King, at that time Arjuna, the son of Pāṇḍu, who was seated in his chariot, his flag marked with Hanumān, took up his bow and prepared to shoot his arrows, looking at the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra. O King, Arjuna then spoke to Hṛṣīkeśa, Kṛṣṇa, these words:"</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So again the word hṛṣīkeśa is used here. In the beginning also, hṛṣīkeśaḥ pāñcajanyam. Kṛṣṇa is again designated as Hṛṣīkeśa. As we have explained several times, bhakti means hṛṣīkena hṛṣīkeśa-sevanaṁ bhaktir ucyate ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 19.170|CC Madhya 19.170]]). Bhakti, the whole devotional service program, means hṛṣīkena hṛṣīkeśa-sevanam. So Arjuna was meant for serving Kṛṣṇa, because he is bhakta. Kṛṣṇa has already addressed him, bhakto 'si, priyo 'si, rahasyaṁ hy etad uttamam: ([[Vanisource:BG 4.3 (1972)|BG 4.3]]) "My dear Arjuna, I am speaking to you the mystery of Bhagavad-gītā." It is a mystery. Mystery means very complicated; no ordinary man can understand. Therefore it is called mystery, rahasyam. But not ordinary rahasyam, uttamam. Uttamam means transcendental, not covered with darkness of material science. But it is brilliant, daivam, divyam. Rahasyam.</p>
<p>So ordinary man cannot understand. Therefore they interpret foolishly, speculate, and demonstrate their rascaldom. That's all. Even big, big scholars. So they cannot understand because they are not devotee. It is meant for the devotee. This whole Bhagavad-gītā is a transaction between God and His devotee. There is nothing more. Just like if you go to the market and two mercantile men talking. So it should be understood that he is also businessman, he is also businessman, so they must be talking something about business. It is natural conclusion. Two businessmen are talking seriously, not that they are discussing Bhagavad-gītā. You cannot say that. They must be talking about business, something about profit.</p>
<p>Just like all the businessmen, they assemble in exchange, like stock exchange. So there is howling, great sound, talking with each other, tumultuous sound. That tumultuous sound means one businessman is talking, "What is your rate? This is my rate. What is your rate?" That's all. You cannot expect that a stock exchange, the people gathered there, they are talking something about Bhāgavata and Bhagavad-gītā. No.</p>
<p>Similarly, when there is talk between the Supreme Lord Kṛṣṇa and His devotee, so this whole talk is bhakti. It is nothing else. They derive some meaning, jñāna, jñānātmaka-vyākhyā. They describe on the understanding of the jñānīs, philosophical speculators. They are also candidate. Those who are jñānis actually, they are also interested to know what is Kṛṣṇa. Jñānī ca bharatarṣabha, jijñāsur. Ārto arthārthī jijñāsur jñānī ca bharatarṣabha ([[Vanisource:BG 7.16 (1972)|BG 7.16]]). These four classes of men, provided their background is pious life....</p>
<p>Impious life cannot inquire about God or can understand about God. We have several times repeated the verse,</p>
:yeṣāṁ tv anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ
:janānāṁ puṇya-karmaṇām
:te dvandva-moha-nirmuktā
:bhajante māṁ dṛḍha-vratāḥ
:([[Vanisource:BG 7.28 (1972)|BG 7.28]])
<p>Pāpīs, sinful men, they cannot understand. They understand, only think that "Kṛṣṇa is Bhagavān; so I am also Bhagavān. He's an ordinary man, maybe little powerful, historically very famous man. So He is, after all, a man. So I am also man. So why not I am God?" This is the conclusion of the abhaktas, non-devotees and sinful men.</p>
<p>So anyone who is declaring himself God, immediately you should know he is the greatest sinful man. And if you study his private life, you will see that he is number one sinful man. This is the test. Otherwise nobody will say that I am God, this false representation. Nobody. Any pious man will not do it. He knows, "What I am? I am ordinary human being. How can I claim to take the position of God?" And they become famous among rascals.</p>
<p>As it is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, śva-viḍ-varāhoṣṭra kharaiḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 2.3.19|SB 2.3.19]]). What is that verse? Uṣṭra-kharaiḥ, saṁstutaḥ puruṣaḥ paśuḥ. They.... in this world we see there are many great men, so-called great men, and they are very much praised by the general people. So Bhāgavata says, that anyone who is not a devotee, who never chants the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, he may be very great man in the estimation of rascals, but he is nothing but an animal. Śva-viḍ-varāha-uṣṭra-kharaiḥ. "So how you can say such a great man. You are saying that animal." Our business is very thankless task. We say any man who is not a devotee, he is rascal. We say generally. It is very harsh word, but we have to use it. As soon as we see that he is not a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, then he's a rascal. How do we say? He is not my enemy, but we have to say because it is stated by Kṛṣṇa.</p>
<p>If we are really Kṛṣṇa conscious, then our business is to repeat the words of Kṛṣṇa. That's all. What is the difference between a Kṛṣṇa's representative and non-representative? The representative of Kṛṣṇa will simply repeat what Kṛṣṇa says. That's all. He becomes representative. It doesn't require much qualification. You simply repeat with firm conviction. As Kṛṣṇa says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66 (1972)|BG 18.66]]). So one who has accepted this fact, that, "If I surrender to Kṛṣṇa, my all business is successful," he is Kṛṣṇa's representative. That's all.</p>
<p>You don't require to be very highly educated or advanced. Simply if you simply accept that what Kṛṣṇa says... Just like Arjuna said, sarvam etaṁ ṛtam manye yad vadasi keśava: ([[Vanisource:BG 10.14 (1972)|BG 10.14]]) "My dear Kṛṣṇa, Keśava, whatever You are saying, I accept it, without any change." That is bhakta. Therefore Arjuna is addressed, bhakto 'si. This is the bhakta's business. Why shall I think of Kṛṣṇa as like me, ordinary man? This is the difference between a bhakta and not bhakta. A bhakta knows that "I am insignificant, a small spark of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is individual person. I am also individual person. But when we consider about His power and my power, I am most insignificant." This is understanding of Kṛṣṇa.</p>
<p>There is no difficulty. Simply one must be sincere, not sinful. But a sinful man cannot understand Him. The sinful man, he will say, "Oh, Kṛṣṇa is also man. I am also man. Why I am not God? He is simply God? No, I am also. I am God. You are God, you are God, every God." Just like Vivekananda said, "Why you are searching after God? Don't you see so many gods are loitering in the street?" You see. This is his God realization. This is his God realization. And he became a big man: "Oh, he is seeing everyone God."</p>
<p>This foolishness, this rascaldom, is going on all over the world. One does not know what is God, what is power of God, what is meant by God. They are accepting some rascal as God. As nowadays, that is going on. Another rascal has come. He is also declaring himself God. So it has become very cheap thing. But they have no brain to think that "I am claiming God; what power I have got?"</p>
<p>So this is the mystery. This is the mystery. Without becoming devotee, the mystery of understanding God is not possible. And Kṛṣṇa has said in the Bhagavad-gītā how one can know Him. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 18.55 (1972)|BG 18.55]]). Only by devotion, simply. He could have said, "By high, topmost knowledge" or "By yogic process" or "By acting, becoming a very great karmī, worker, one can understand Me." No, he has never said, never said. So the karmīs, jñānīs, yogis, they are all rascals. They cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. All rascals. Karmīs are third-class rascals, the jñānīs are second-class rascal, and the yogis are first-class rascal. That's all.</p>
<p>You should understand, the so-called yogis, they are first-class rascal because they do not understand Kṛṣṇa. The jñānīs they are also second-class rascal. Even a big scholar like Dr. Radhakrishnan, he is how, I mean to say, deforming the meaning of Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa says man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru: ([[Vanisource:BG 18.65 (1972)|BG 18.65]]) "You always think..." This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, man-manā: "Always think of Kṛṣṇa, Me, about Me," Kṛṣṇa says. And they will make meaning that you can say also. "Kṛṣṇa says that you always think of Him; you can say also, Think of me." This meaning, they are distorting. So Kṛṣṇa says man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru ([[Vanisource:BG 18.65 (1972)|BG 18.65]]), and this Dr. Radhakrishnan says, "It is not to the Kṛṣṇa person." Just see. Just a big scholar, doctor of philosophy, he cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says directly, man-manā bhava mad-bhaktaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 9.34 (1972)|BG 9.34]]). He is interpreting in a different way.</p>
<p>Therefore this word is used here, hṛṣīkeśa. Hṛṣīkeśam idaṁ vākyam, hṛṣīkeśam tadā vākyam idam āha mahī-pate ([[Vanisource:BG 1.20 (1972)|BG 1.20]]). Mahī-pate, "O King..." Sañjaya was addressing Dhṛtarāṣṭra. He's a king. So mahī-pate. Hṛṣīkeśaṁ kapi-dhvajaḥ. Kapi-dhvajaḥ is nominative. So "He said..." Kapi-dhvajaḥ. Kapi-dhvajaḥ is also significant. Kapi-dhvajaḥ, Arjuna, on his... Just like nowadays also, every nation has different types of flags, so Arjuna also had his flag on the... Dhvajaḥ. Dhvajaḥ means the flag. The flag was on the top of his chariot. And it was marked with Hanumān, Vajrāṅgajī, Vajrāṅgajī, Hanumān, who fought for Lord Rāmacandra. He is fighting for Kṛṣṇa. So he is also following the footsteps of Vajrāṅgajī.</p>
<p>Vaiṣṇavism is like that. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 17.186|CC Madhya 17.186]]). Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. Vaiṣṇava should follow his previous mahājana, authority. That is Vaiṣṇavism. We don't manufacture ideas. We don't commit such rascaldom. We simply accept the behavior or the activities of previous ācāryas. There is no difficulty. There is no difficulty.</p>
<p>So in the fighting principle, Arjuna is fighting for Kṛṣṇa. He is following the previous fighting ācārya, Hanumānji. Therefore he has depicted his flag with Hanumān, that "Hanumānji, Vajrāṅgajī, kindly help me." This is Vaiṣṇavism. "I have come here to fight for Lord Kṛṣṇa. You fought also for the Lord. Kindly help me." This is the idea. Kapi-dhvajaḥ. So any activities of the Vaiṣṇava, they should always pray to the previous ācārya, "Kindly help me. Kindly..." This is, Vaiṣṇava is always thinking himself helpless, helpless. And begging help from the previous ācārya.</p>
<p>Just like in Caitanya-caritāmṛta you will find, the author, at the end of every chapter:</p>
:śrī rūpa-raghunātha-pade yāra āśa
:caitanya-caritāmṛta kahe kṛṣṇadāsa
:([[Vanisource:CC Adi 1.110|CC Adi 1.110]])
<p>His every line, he is thinking of Rūpa-Raghunātha, previous ācāryas. "So let me surrender to the gosvāmīs and they will help me how to write." You cannot write. That is not possible.</p>
<p>So this is Vaiṣṇava's policy. Vaiṣṇava ṭhākura, tomāra kukkura, baliyā janaha more. Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has sung, "My dear vaiṣṇava ṭhākura, you just accept me as your dog, as the dog works by the indication of the master." He will give his life. Dog has a good qualification. However a strong dog may be, when the master orders, he will give his life. This is dog, faithful, so faithful to the master. So vaiṣṇava ṭhākura... So Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura is praying, vaiṣṇava ṭhākura, tomāra kukkura, baliyā janaha more: "My dear vaiṣṇava ṭhākura..." Vaiṣṇava ṭhākura means guru. "Kindly accept me as your dog." And he describes, I forget the exact language, that "I will always try to protect you. As dog keeps watch, so I will watch so nobody will come to disturb you. And whatever little prasādam you'll give me, I'll be satisfied." That dog's qualification. The master is eating, but the dog will never come, unless the master gives little morsel. He is satisfied. He is satisfied.</p>
<p>So this is Vaiṣṇavism, to follow the previous ācārya. This is Vaiṣṇavism. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 17.186|CC Madhya 17.186]]), dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ mahājano yena gataḥ.... Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā. Tarko, if you are very great logician, you can argue, "Oh why Kṛṣṇa can be God? I can be God," by logic you may defeat an ignorant devotee, but śāstra says by becoming a big logician, you cannot understand transcendental knowledge. Transcendental knowledge you have to understand by submitting, praṇipātena, tad viddhi praṇipātena ([[Vanisource:BG 4.34 (1972)|BG 4.34]]). First of all surrender. Tad viddhi. If you want to know this transcendental science, then you must fully surrender. This is first qualification. Tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā. Three things. First surrender; then if you cannot understand, then you question. Otherwise you have no right to question from a Vaiṣṇava.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>