|
|
| Line 12: |
Line 12: |
| [[Category:Anyone Who...]] | | [[Category:Anyone Who...]] |
| [[Category:Say]] | | [[Category:Say]] |
| [[Category:That]]
| |
| [[Category:There Is No Soul]] | | [[Category:There Is No Soul]] |
| [[Category:There Is No]] | | [[Category:There Is No]] |
| [[Category:Birth]] | | [[Category:No Birth]] |
| [[Category:After]] | | [[Category:Life After Death]] |
| [[Category:His]]
| |
| [[Category:Death]]
| |
| [[Category:They Are]] | | [[Category:They Are]] |
| [[Category:All]] | | [[Category:Rascal]] |
| [[Category:Fools and Rascals]] | | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - Lectures, 1966 - 1977]] |
| | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - Lectures, 1972]] |
| | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - Lectures, Srimad-Bhagavatam]] |
| | [[Category:Prabhupada Speaks - in USA, Dallas]] |
| </div> | | </div> |
| <div id="section"> | | <div id="section"> |
| Line 34: |
Line 34: |
| </div> | | </div> |
|
| |
|
| | |
| | <mp3player>https://vanipedia.s3.amazonaws.com/clip/720912SB-DALLAS_clip0.mp3</mp3player> |
| <div class="quote_link"> | | <div class="quote_link"> |
| [[Vanisource:720912 - Lecture SB 02.01.01 - Dallas|720912 - Lecture SB 02.01.01 - Dallas]] | | [[Vanisource:720912 - Lecture SB 02.01.01 - Dallas|720912 - Lecture SB 02.01.01 - Dallas]] |
| </div> | | </div> |
| <div class="text"> | | <div class="text"> |
| The people do not know what is the value of life, so he agreed that your question is varīyān, varīyān means glorious. Why glorious? So because the answer to be given it will be beneficial for the whole people of the world. Just like Arjuna was talking with Kṛṣṇa and putting some questions and he was answering Kṛṣṇa, and that answer is not only for Arjuna, it is for every human being.
| | So Indian system of acquiring knowledge means it must be approved by persons who know what is the . . . or the person who is giving some statement he must quote from Vedic literature in support of his claim. That is to be realised otherwise whimsically if you say something, at least we Kṛṣṇa consciousness . . . (indistinct) . . . you will not accept. Unless there is approved scientific statement, we don’t care for any of it. Therefore it is said ''ātmavit-sammataḥ'', ''ātmavit'' one who has realised the soul, not for one any other person. |
| | |
| When Kṛṣṇa asked Arjuna to "Surrender unto to Me" that: sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁśaraṇaṁ vraja ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66|BG 18.66]]). This was not meant for Arjuna only, it was meant for all human beings. When Kṛṣṇa says: man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru ([[Vanisource:BG 18.65|BG 18.65]]) "You just become My devotee, worship Me, offer your obeisances unto Me," so this is not only for Arjuna this is for the whole human kind.
| |
| | |
| Although Arjuna is considered a human being who was present. Similarly here also the question is welcome because Kṛṣṇa (indistinct). Simply by questioning about Kṛṣṇa, what we can understand what is Kṛṣṇa and when we understand what is Kṛṣṇa then immediately you are liberated. Therefore Śukadeva Gosvāmī says that your praśnaḥ, enquiry is very glorious.
| |
| | |
| Ātmavit-sammataḥ, ātmavit those who know the value of life it is approved by them. It is approved by persons who know the value of life then it is acceptable, whether (indistinct) approved. Not that I theorise something, where your approval? The atheist class they say, "There is no God," where. Where is the proof of your statement? You say, "There is no God," I say, "There is God." We settle up this (indistinct) prove whether you are right or I am right.
| |
| | |
| So when man says, "There is no God," where is the evidence? You must say something which is scientific, approved by learned scholars but we find... So most of them they will approve that, "Yes there is God, we cannot say that there is no God." Besides that we have got Vedic proof, if you say something, if you cannot quote from the Vedas then it is not accepted. Just like the law court if you propose some legal significance you must quote from the law books. Then it will be accepted by the judge otherwise if you manufacture something it will be not accepted in the law court.
| |
| | |
| So Indian system of acquiring knowledge means it must be approved by persons who know what is the… Or the person who is giving some statement he must quote from Vedic literature in support of his claim. That is to be realised otherwise whimsically if you say something, at least we Kṛṣṇa consciousness (indistinct) you will not accept. Unless there is approved scientific statement, we don’t care for any of it. Therefore it is said ātmavit-sammataḥ, ātmavit one who has realised the soul, not for one any other person. | |
| | |
| One who has not realised soul, ātma, these statements which are proven will not be accepted because he is a fool. Anyone who says that there is no soul, there is no birth after his death, they are all rascals. Immediately (indistinct), that he is first-class rascal, talking all nonsense. It should not be allowed. Maybe in the estimation of modern people, that man is a great scientist or a great philosopher. He is not actually scientist or philosopher because he does not know what is next, where he will go after the life, he does not know. Then what is the value of his vast knowledge? No value.
| |
|
| |
|
| Here it is said that, ātmavit-sammataḥ puṁsām and this question is very important therefore he says, śrotavyādiṣu yaḥparaḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 2.1.1|SB 2.1.1]]). To prepare…, we have got to hear so many things (indistinct) that is our life to question just like a child questions his mother, "What is this mother, what is this mother." That child is very intelligent if a child questions than it is to be understood he is going to be a very learned scholar in the future, these are the symptoms, inquisitive. Without inquisitiveness the last question should be, "What is God?" That is very nice if the persons do not enquire about God he's animal. The animals cannot enquire, "What is God?"A human being must enquire, "What is God?", and he must try to understand.
| | One who has not realised soul, ''ātma'', these statements which are proven will not be accepted because he is a fool. Anyone who says that there is no soul, there is no birth after his death, they are all rascals. Immediately . . . (indistinct) . . . that he is first-class rascal, talking all nonsense. It should not be allowed. Maybe in the estimation of modern people, that man is a great scientist or a great philosopher. He is not actually scientist or philosopher because he does not know what is next, where he will go after the life, he does not know. Then what is the value of his vast knowledge? No value. |
| </div> | | </div> |
| </div> | | </div> |
| </div> | | </div> |
