View source for Why they should interpret? Interpretation is required when there is no understanding. If the matter is clearly understood, why interpretation? This is rascaldom

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Why they should interpret? Interpretation is required when there is no understanding. If the matter is clearly understood, why interpretation? This is rascaldom"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|PoojaA}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|2022-08-30T07:00:11Z}}
{{last|2022-08-30T07:00:11Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Why Should]]
[[Category:Interpretation Is Required When Things Are Not Clear]]
[[Category:Subject Matter]]
[[Category:Clear Understanding]]
[[Category:Why]]
[[Category:Interpretation]]
[[Category:This Is]]
[[Category:Rascaldom]]
[[Category:Pages Needing Audio - POOJA]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>1974 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">
<div class="quote_heading">
Prabhupāda: Why they should interpret? Interpretation is required when there is no understanding. If the matter is clearly understood, why interpretation? This is rascaldom. Everyone understands this is called glass. And where is the use of interpretation? Here is a glass. Everyone can understand. Or spectacle. "No, no. This is meaning this." Why? If the thing is clearly understood, there is no question of interpretation. You cannot give.
</div>

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:740411 - Morning Walk - Bombay|740411 - Morning Walk - Bombay]]
</div>
<div class="text">
Yaśomatīnandana: By our logical research we can come to Bhagavad-gītā and find out Kṛṣṇa is the only person in the whole world who says that, "This comes from Me."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Water comes from your body, perspiration. So why not from Kṛṣṇa's body? Simple reasoning. (break) . . . ānanda-vigrahaḥ. (break) . . . tap produces water. An inanimate object, a small material thing, it produces water. And Kṛṣṇa cannot produce such water? (break) . . . potency. They are explained. But because we do not go to right teacher, we do not understand. That is the difficulty.

Indian man (1): But the teachers give different interpretation of the same thing.

Prabhupāda: No. The same thing means he is a rascal teacher. He is not teacher; he is cheater. When a cheater takes the place of a teacher, he explains differently. And when a teacher is there, he will explain rightly. Where is the difficulty? I have several times said that, "Where is the difficulty to understand Bhagavad-gītā?" There is not a single line which is very difficult to understand. Just like Kṛṣṇa says, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam ([[Vanisource:BG 4.1 (1972)|BG 4.1]]): "I first of all said this philosophy to Vivasvan, the sun-god." So where is the difficulty to understand this line? Where is the difficulty?

Indian man (1): No difficulty in understanding. Interpretation . . .

Prabhupāda: Why they should interpret? Interpretation is required when there is no understanding. If the matter is clearly understood, why interpretation? This is rascaldom. Everyone understands this is called glass. And where is the use of interpretation? Here is a glass. Everyone can understand. Or spectacle. "No, no. This is meaning this." Why? If the thing is clearly understood, there is no question of interpretation. You cannot give. Suppose if you go to the court, if the thing is clearly understood that, "This man has committed this criminal activity. He should be punished," so where is the difficulty? No. If somebody . . . "No, no. This 'He should be punished' means not now; after three hundred years he should be punished." Is that interpretation? He should be punished immediately. That's all.

Indian man (1): It's not like that. The material thing we can see from our . . . (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: You are material, you are not spiritual. You are a material fool. Why do you interpret foolishly?

Indian man (1): There's no doubt about it.

Indian man (2): According to their brain and knowledge, they must have . . . (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: That means rubbish brain, rubbish brain. You go, interpret and change the law. You go in the law court and you interpret in your own way. Can you interpret in the law court, "Sir, I have got a different interpretation"? "Get out. Get out, rascal, from this . . ."

Indian man (1): No, no. Even the judges in the Supreme Court in India, they go after the interpretations, they go and they become also one with the . . .

Prabhupāda: No, no. That is extraordinarily. When the meaning of the law is not very clear, that takes place. But when the thing is very clear, there is no question of interpretation.

Indian man (1): Why there is a fight? Because both the things, both the lawyers, they take it in different way and so they come to the judge.

Prabhupāda: That's right. But it is not different in such a way that you call a spectacle a something else.

Indian man (4): Bhagavad-gītā is really . . .

Yaśomatīnandana: Judge decides who is the right one.

Prabhupāda: Yes, but it said in the Bhagavad-gītā clearly. It is said clearly, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān: "I told this philosophy to Vivasvān." Where is the difficulty to understand? Dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 1.1 (1972)|BG 1.1]]): "In the dharma-kṣetre, kuru-kṣetre, two parties willing to fight, they assembled." Where is the difficulty to understand? Why these rascals should interpret in a different way?

Indian man (1): These are all . . . they are not interpreting that particular word.

Prabhupāda: They are doing.

Yaśomatīnandana: "There is nothing like Kurukṣetra," they say.

Indian man (4): Kurukṣetra is another group of people, their own brain creation. That we should not . . .

Prabhupāda: What right you have got to interpret?

Indian man (1): Whatever it is they are saying, material thing we can, we should not interpret, and we cannot.

Prabhupāda: But you are, after all, material. You are not spiritual. In order to get you on the spiritual platform, things are being spoken by Kṛṣṇa.

Indian man (4): And to understand something we must have . . .

Prabhupāda: How you become all of a sudden spiritual? What is that spiritual? You do not understand what is spiritual, and you say: "It is spiritual."

Indian man (1): Well, something which we cannot see by our own eyes, something which we cannot . . .

Prabhupāda: Then why do you interpret if you cannot see with your own eyes? You are blind. Why should you interpret? A blind man is interpreting? What is this nonsense?

Yaśomatīnandana: It is just like Kṛṣṇa says: "I am here."

Prabhupāda: The blind man is just, "Oh, the elephant is big pillar."

Indian man (1): Same thing will say that elephant is only trunk.

Prabhupāda: That's it. This kind of interpretation, what is the meaning?

Indian man (1): They don't have that complete view of the whole.

Prabhupāda: If you are blind, you accept that, "I am blind man. I cannot study what is this elephant," that is another thing. That is good. And if you are blind and by blind eyes you, "Oh, elephant is a pillar . . ."

Indian man (1): Somebody . . . some other blind will say the trunk . . .

Prabhupāda: So the blind man has no right to interpret. That is the point. Blind man . . . you are blind man. Remain as a blind man. Don't talk nonsense. That is our protest. Why should you interpret? You are blind man.

Indian man (4): They should not try to, just around, create the meaning of it.

Prabhupāda: Yes.
</div>
</div>
</div>