|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| <div id="compilation"> | | <div id="compilation"> |
| <div id="facts"> | | <div id="facts"> |
| {{terms|"Sri-sampradaya, Brahma-sampradaya, Rudra-sampradaya. They are all in agreement that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead"}} | | {{terms|"Śrī-sampradāya, Brahmā-sampradāya, Rudra-sampradāya—they are all in agreement that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead"}} |
| {{notes|}} | | {{notes|}} |
| {{compiler|LindaB}} | | {{compiler|LindaB}} |
| Line 14: |
Line 14: |
| [[Category:Rudra-sampradaya]] | | [[Category:Rudra-sampradaya]] |
| [[Category:They Are]] | | [[Category:They Are]] |
| [[Category:All]]
| |
| [[Category:In Agreement]] | | [[Category:In Agreement]] |
| [[Category:Krsna Is]] | | [[Category:Krsna Is The Supreme Personality of Godhead]] |
| [[Category:Supreme Personality of Godhead]] | | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - Lectures, 1966 - 1977]] |
| | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - Lectures, 1972]] |
| | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - Lectures, Bhagavad-gita As It Is]] |
| | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - in India, Ahmedabad]] |
| </div> | | </div> |
| <div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2> | | <div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2> |
| Line 26: |
Line 28: |
| <div class="heading">Śrī-sampradāya, Brahma-sampradāya, Rudra-sampradāya. They are all in agreement that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All these ācāryas. They'll not say anything that "Because I belong to Brahma-sampradāya, I speak something else." No. We are all in agreement that kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). That is accepted. | | <div class="heading">Śrī-sampradāya, Brahma-sampradāya, Rudra-sampradāya. They are all in agreement that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All these ācāryas. They'll not say anything that "Because I belong to Brahma-sampradāya, I speak something else." No. We are all in agreement that kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). That is accepted. |
| </div> | | </div> |
| <span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972|Lecture on BG Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">If we want to understand the real fact, then we must receive from the paramparā system. Just like we have got our genealogical table. I understand my great-great-grandfather by the paramparā system. Not that I manufacture some name. No. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says that imam, evaṁ paramparā-prāptam ([[Vanisource:BG 4.2|BG 4.2]]). The Bhagavad-gītā, knowledge must be received by the paramparā system, as it was spoken by Kṛṣṇa and as it has been received by the later ācāryas. Although there are different parties... Just like the Śrī-sampradāya, Brahma-sampradāya, Rudra-sampradāya. They are all in agreement that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All these ācāryas. They'll not say anything that "Because I belong to Brahma-sampradāya, I speak something else." No. We are all in agreement that kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam ([[Vanisource:SB 1.3.28|SB 1.3.28]]). That is accepted.</p> | | |
| <p>So Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna: sa kāleneha yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. "In due..., in course of time, that paramparā system has been lost, or broken. Therefore," Kṛṣṇa said, "I am speaking the old truth unto you so that you begin the paramparā system again." So we have to accept Bhagavad-gītā by the paramparā system. Even the old system is broken, still, it is existing because Kṛṣṇa is speaking to Arjuna, and we have to understand Bhagavad-gītā as Arjuna understood. Then you are in the paramparā. And if you understand Bhagavad-gītā as some so-called scholar understands, then you are not understanding Bhagavad-gītā. You are understanding something nonsense, wasting your time. This is the fact. If you try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as Arjuna understood... That is not difficult. Arjuna's understanding is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. So if you follow the footprints of Arjuna, then you are rightly understanding Bhagavad-gītā. But if you are following the footprints of some rascal, then you are not understanding Bhagavad-gītā. You are understanding something else. This is the secret. Here we have got so many commentaries on Bhagavad-gītā, as one thinks. As if Kṛṣṇa left Bhagavad-gītā to be commented by some rascals to understand! Why? He said Bhagavad-gītā clearly. Why it is to be interpreted by some rascals? Did Kṛṣṇa mean that "I leave Bhagavad-gītā ambiguous and some learned scholar will come. He will explain"? What is this nonsense? Everything is clear. Bhagavad-gītā, in the beginning it is said that</p>
| | |
| :dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre
| | <mp3player>https://vanipedia.s3.amazonaws.com/clip/721208LE-AHMEDABAD_clip003.mp3</mp3player> |
| :samavetā yuyutsavaḥ
| | <span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972|Lecture on BG Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;"> |
| :māmakāḥ pāṇḍavāś caiva
| | If we want to understand the real fact, then we must receive from the ''paramparā'' system. Just like we have got our genealogical table. I understand my great-great-grandfather by the ''paramparā'' system. Not that I manufacture some name. No. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says that ''imam'' . . . ''evaṁ paramparā-prāptam'' ([[vanisource:BG 4.2 (1972)|BG 4.2]]). The ''Bhagavad-gītā'', knowledge must be received by the ''paramparā'' system, as it was spoken by Kṛṣṇa and as it has been received by the later ''ācāryas''. |
| :kim akurvata sañjaya
| | |
| :([[Vanisource:BG 1.1|BG 1.1]])
| | Although there are different parties— just like the Śrī-sampradāya, Brahmā-sampradāya, Rudra-sampradāya—they are all in agreement that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All these ''ācāryas''. They'll not say anything that, "Because I belong to Brahmā-sampradāya, I speak something else." No. We are all in agreement that ''kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam'' ([[vanisource:SB 1.3.28|SB 1.3.28]]). That is accepted. |
| <p>Now, why it should be interpreted that "Dharma-kṣetra means this, kuru-kṣetra means this, pāṇḍavāḥ means this"? Why? It is clear. Kurukṣetra still existing. Everyone knows. And that is dharma-kṣetra. Everyone knows. It is not known now. From the Vedic age. Kuru-kṣetre dharmam ācaret. Still people go there for performing ritualistic ceremonies. So Kurukṣetra is still there and it is dharma-kṣetra from time immemorial. Why it should be interpreted that "Kurukṣetra means this, and dharma-kṣetra means this"? Why? Where is the dictionary?</p>
| | |
| | So Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna, ''sa kāleneha yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa'' ([[vanisource:BG 4.2 (1972)|BG 4.2]]): "In due . . . in course of time, that ''paramparā'' system has been lost, or broken. Therefore," Kṛṣṇa said: "I am speaking the old truth unto you so that you begin the ''paramparā'' system again." So we have to accept ''Bhagavad-gītā'' by the ''paramparā'' system. |
| | |
| | Even the old system is broken, still, it is existing because Kṛṣṇa is speaking to Arjuna, and we have to understand ''Bhagavad-gītā'' as Arjuna understood. Then you are in the ''paramparā''. And if you understand ''Bhagavad-gītā'' as some so-called scholar understands, then you are not understanding ''Bhagavad-gītā''—you are understanding something nonsense, wasting your time. This is the fact. |
| | |
| | If you try to understand ''Bhagavad-gītā'' as Arjuna understood . . . that is not difficult. Arjuna's understanding is there in the ''Bhagavad-gītā''. So if you follow the footprints of Arjuna, then you are rightly understanding ''Bhagavad-gītā''. But if you are following the footprints of some rascal, then you are not understanding ''Bhagavad-gītā''; you are understanding something else. |
| | |
| | This is the secret. Here we have got so many commentaries on ''Bhagavad-gītā'', as one thinks. As if Kṛṣṇa left ''Bhagavad-gītā'' to be commented by some rascals to understand. Why? He said ''Bhagavad-gītā'' clearly. Why it is to be interpreted by some rascals? Did Kṛṣṇa mean that "I leave ''Bhagavad-gītā'' ambiguous and some learned scholar will come. He will explain"? What is this nonsense? Everything is clear. |
| </div> | | </div> |
| </div> | | </div> |
| </div> | | </div> |
