The whole Vedic knowledge is infallible. There are different examples how we take Vedic knowledge as infallible. Take for example, so far the Hindus are concerned, and how they accept the Vedic knowledge as complete, here is an insignificant example. Just like the cow dung. The cow dung is the stool of an animal. According to smṛti or Vedic wisdom, if one touches the stool of an animal he has to take his bath to purify himself. But in the Vedic scriptures the cow dung is as stated as pure. Rather, impure place or impure things are purified by touch of the cow dung. Now if one argues how it is that in one place it is said that the stool of the animal is impure and another place it is said that the cow dung which is also the stool of an animal, it is pure, so it is contradictory. But actually, it may appear to be contradictory, but because it is Vedic injunction, therefore for our practical purposes we accept it. And by that acceptance we are not committing mistake. It has been found by modern chemists, modern science, one Dr. Lal Mohan Gosal, he has very minutely analyzed the cow dung and he has found that cow dung is a composition of all antiseptic properties. So similarly, he has also analyzed the water of the Ganges out of curiosity. So my idea is that Vedic knowledge is complete because it is above all doubts and all mistakes. So, and Bhagavad-gītā is the essence of all Vedic knowledge. The Vedic knowledge is therefore infallible. It comes down through the perfect disciplic succession.
Argue (Lectures, BG)
Expressions researched:
"argue"
|"argued"
|"arguer"
|"argues"
|"arguing"
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
When Kṛṣṇa was present on this planet, nobody could control Kṛṣṇa, but He controlled everyone. Nobody could control Kṛṣṇa. So therefore the great saintly persons, even Brahmā, they have decided, that īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ: (Bs. 5.1) "The Supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa." He controls even Brahmā, ādi-kavaye. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said, tene brahma hṛdā ādi-kavaye (SB 1.1.1). Tene, He instructed Brahmā śabda-brahma, Vedic knowledge, hṛdā, through heart. That is Hṛṣīkeśa. You can argue that "Brahmā was the first creature within this universe. So how he could be instructed by somebody else?" No. The somebody else is always there within the heart, Hṛṣīkeśa. Hṛṣīkeśa means controller. Sarvasya cāham... Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, sarvasya, in the fifteenth chapter, sarvasya ca ahaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭaḥ: "I am sitting in everyone's heart." Mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca: (BG 15.15) "From Me, one remembers and one forgets also." Forgets also. If you want to forget Kṛṣṇa, so Kṛṣṇa will give you such intelligence that you will forget Him forever. Ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham (BG 4.11).
So this is Vaiṣṇavism, to follow the previous ācārya. This is Vaiṣṇavism. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (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 (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.
Here is a technique. The same Kṛṣṇa and same Arjuna, they are talking as friends. Then what was the necessity of Arjuna accepting Kṛṣṇa as spiritual master? The same Arjuna and same Kṛṣṇa, they'll talk, but what is the necessity of accepting as spiritual master? That means after accepting spiritual master he'll not argue. He'll simply accept whatever He says. That is the technique. Friendly talks, equal level, He, Kṛṣṇa was talking something and he was replying. So that argument has no end. But when he accepts Him as spiritual master, there is no more argument. One has to accept whatever He says. Therefore he's accepting as spiritual master. After this, Arjuna will never say, "This is wrong, this is, no," or "I don't agree." No. He'll accept.
We have to follow the footprints of pure devotees. It is said that tarkaḥ apratiṣṭhaḥ. If you want to become pure by your arguments and logic, that is not possible. I may be defeated by another strong man who is stronger in argument than me, so this is not the way of becoming purified, tarka, simply arguing. Tarkaḥ apratiṣṭhaḥ smṛtayo vibhinnāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186) . Śrutayaḥ, scriptures. Suppose somebody sticks to the scriptures. So scriptures, there are different types of scripture. So they are vibhinna. Vibhinna means different types. So how we can become purified by, even by following the scriptures? Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ smṛtayo vibhinnā na cāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. Muni means thoughtful, philosophers. If we follow a particular type of philosopher, that is also not perfect because I may be under the care of a philosopher, frog philosopher. So that is also not sure. Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ smṛtayo vibhinnā na cāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām.
This gives me so much pleasure that I cry." Caitanya Mahāprabhu embraced him, "Your Bhagavad-gītā reading is perfect. You have taken the essence." So this is the thing. If you simply remember Kṛṣṇa is teaching Arjuna and Arjuna is hearing, if you simply remember the picture, that is sufficient. Even if you think that you cannot read. Because after all we have to become Kṛṣṇa conscious. We haven't got to become a learned man to argue with another learned man. If it is possible we can do that, but that does not make any difference if I cannot argue with others or if I cannot teach very nicely Bhagavad-gītā to others. Simply if I remember this picture, that is perfection. Because we have to become Kṛṣṇa conscious. We have to simply think of Kṛṣṇa. You think in any way. That is your perfection. Smartavyaḥ satataṁ viṣṇuḥ. This is the injunction. You have to think of Viṣṇu always. This is samādhi; this is meditation; this is yoga siddhi, perfection of yoga.
The same body is lying here as dead body, whom we are lamenting, "my father," but you have never seen your father. You have seen only the coats and pants and the body. That is your education. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, "Arjuna, you are thinking on terms of this coats and pants and bones and muscles and urine and stool. Therefore you are rascal number one." This is the first instruction, aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā... (BG 2.11). "Do any gentlemen lament for this torn-up cloth, bones and skins and urine and stool? Does any sane man lament?" This is the first instruction. So aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase: "You are talking just like a very learned man to argue with Me, but you are fool number one because"—gatāsūn agatāsūṁś ca nānuśocanti paṇḍitāḥ—"this is not the business of the paṇḍita."
So Kṛṣṇa has got enemies also, what to speak of ourself. This material world is so made, that you must have some enemies. Matsaratā. Matsaratā means enviousness, jealousy. This material world is like that. So there are jealous enemies of God also. They are called demons. Ordinary jealousy or enemy, that is natural. But even to God. Just like yesterday night, evening, somebody came to see me. He was arguing that "Why Kṛṣṇa should be accepted as God?" That was his argument. So Kṛṣṇa has enemies. Therefore Kṛṣṇa... Not only He, but everyone who is in the material world is enemy of Kṛṣṇa. Everyone. Because they want to be competitor of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says that bhoktāram: "I am the supreme enjoyer." Sarva-loka-maheśvaram: (BG 5.29) "I am the Supreme proprietor." And the Vedas also confirm, īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam (ISO 1). "Everything is the property of the Supreme Lord." Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. These are Vedic injunctions. Yato vā imāni bhūtāni jāyante: "From whom everything has come." Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). These are Vedic versions. But still, we, because we are enemies, "No, why Kṛṣṇa shall be the proprietor? I am the proprietor. Why Kṛṣṇa shall be God only. I have got another God. Here is another God."
If we accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and "Why He was inducing Arjuna to fight?" It does not mean that He was inducing Arjuna to do something wrong. But from worldly point of view, Arjuna was a very pious man and he was declining to fight, not to kill his kinsmen, not to kill his friends. This... This is a very important point. So he argued, "No, no, if I fight, my people will die, and their wives will become widow, and they will be adulterated, and then, by adulteration, unwanted population will increase, and who will offer śrāddha?" Śrāddha... There is a ceremony of śrāddha according to Hindu scripture. I do not know whether you have in your Christian religion, but according to Hindu, a dead body is offered some respect every year. Just like death anniversary observed, similarly, in the family, the descendants, they offer some foodstuff after some religious ceremony. That is called śrāddha. And it is believed that that offering goes to the dead forefathers. So that is a family religious ceremony. So Arjuna said that "These people will die. Who will offer that ablution to the forefathers?" So from ordinary point of view, from the point of view of a family man, he argued with Kṛṣṇa in so many ways. And after, at the end, he decided that "I cannot fight. I cannot fight." Then Kṛṣṇa tried to induce him, and he said that "Yes, whatever You are saying, that I am a kṣatriya and I am not doing my duty, this is all right, but My mind is perplexed." So he was at the same time conscious that Śrī Kṛṣṇa only can make a solution of this perplexity.
Devotee: Verse 11: "The Blessed Lord said: While speaking learned words you are mourning for what is not worthy of grief. Those who are wise lament neither for the living nor the dead (BG 2.11)." Purport: "The Lord at once took the position of a teacher and chastised his student, calling him indirectly a fool. The Lord said, 'You are talking like a learned man, but you do not know that one who is learned, one who knows what is body and what is soul, does not lament for any stage of the body, neither in the living nor in the dead condition.' As explained in the later chapters, it will be clear that knowledge means to know matter and spirit and the controller of both. Arjuna argued that religious principles should be given more importance than politics or sociology, but he did not know that knowledge of matter, soul and the Supreme is more important than religious formularies. And because he was lacking in that knowledge, he should not have posed himself as a very learned man. As he did not happen to be a very learned man, he was consequently lamenting for something which was unworthy of lamentation. The body is born and is destined to be vanquished today or tomorrow. Therefore the body is not as important as the soul. One who knows this is actually learned. For him there is no cause for lamentation in any stage of the material body."
Prabhupāda: He says, Kṛṣṇa says, that "This body, either dead or alive, has nothing to be lamented." Dead body, suppose when the body is dead, it has no value. What is the use of lamenting? You can lament for many thousands of years, it will not come to life. So there is no cause of lamenting on dead body. And so far spirit soul is concerned, that is eternal. Even it appears to be dead, or with the death of this body, he does not die. So why one should be overwhelmed, "Oh, my father is dead, my such and such relative is dead," and crying? He's not dead. This knowledge one must have. Then he'll be cheerful in all cases and he'll be interested simply in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There is nothing to be lamented for the body, either alive or dead. That is being instructed by Kṛṣṇa in this chapter.
Devotee: "Kṛṣṇa affirms His individuality in the past and confirms His individuality in the future also. He has confirmed His individuality in many ways, and impersonal Brahman has been declared as subordinate to Him. Kṛṣṇa has maintained spiritual individuality all along, and if He is accepted as an ordinary conditioned soul in individual consciousness, then His Bhagavad-gītā has no value as authoritative scripture. A common man with all the defects of human frailty is unable to teach that which is worth hearing. Bhagavad-gītā is above such literature. No mundane book compares with the Bhagavad-gītā. When one accepts Kṛṣṇa as an ordinary man, the Bhagavad-gītā loses all importance. The Māyāvādī argues that the plurality mentioned in this verse is conventional and that the plurality thus refers to the body. But previous to this verse such a bodily conception has already been condemned. After condemning the bodily conception of living entities, how was it possible for Kṛṣṇa to place a conventional proposition on the body again? Therefore, the plurality is on spiritual grounds as is confirmed by great teachers like Śrī Rāmānuja. It is clearly mentioned in many places in the Bhagavad-gītā that this spiritual plurality is understood by those who are devotees of the Lord. Those who are envious of Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead have no bona fide access to the great literature. The nondevotee's approach to the teachings of the Bhagavad-gītā is something like a bee licking on a bottle of honey. One cannot have a taste of honey unless one can taste within the bottle. Similarly, the mysticism of the Bhagavad-gītā can be understood only by devotees. No one else can taste it, as is stated in the Fourth Chapter of the book. Nor can the Gītā be touched by persons who envy the very existence of the Lord. Therefore the Māyāvādī explanation of the Gītā is a most misleading presentation of the whole truth. Lord Caitanya has forbidden us to read commentaries made by the Māyāvādīs."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Lord Caitanya has clearly said, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). One meets disaster if he hears a Māyāvādī philosopher to understand Vedic literature. That is His injunction. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Sarva-nāśa means disaster. It is actually disaster. A māyāvādi-bhāṣya, Māyāvādī commentary, they have simply tried, (that) the individual, tiny individual spiritual spark that "You are the Supreme." So he's just (like) Dr. Frog. You see. So puffed up, puffed up, when he... At one time, it will burst. Therefore it is disastrous. It is disastrous. (chuckling) Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. So that's all. Finished? Yes. Oh, not yet?
Prabhupāda: So you read very carefully Bhagavad-gītā. You have to meet so many opposing elements; so you have to argue and convince them. Hm. (saṅkīrtana party enters and offers obeisances) So, what is your report?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Yesterday we sold 125 magazines and collected twenty dollars. Today, so far, Junior Dave(?), he has sold... How many have you sold today?
Junior Dave: Eighty-five.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Eighty-five today so far.
Prabhupāda: And there is night.
So everything is "mine." "My body, my head, my leg." Everything is "mine," but where is the "I?" That should be the inquiry, that "Everything, I am speaking 'mine.' Where is that 'I'?" As soon as we come to this point, "Where is that 'I'?" then our human sense is developed. Otherwise we are in the animal sense of life. So Kṛṣṇa is, I mean to say, instructing Arjuna that aśocyān anvaśocas tvam: (BG 2.11) "My dear Arjuna, you are lamenting on the subject matter which is not the subject matter of lamentation." Aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase. Prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase. "You are talking like a very intelligent, learned scholar." Because in the previous chapter he was arguing with Kṛṣṇa, giving evidences from śāstra on the bodily concept of life. But he does not know the śāstras say, "One who is in the bodily concept of life, he is no better than an ass or cow." That he did not know.
So in order to understand... Just like Kṛṣṇa is teaching Arjuna. Before this, Kṛṣṇa surrendered himself. Śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ prapannam (BG 2.7). Although they were friends, Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna were friends... First of all, they were talking like friends, and Arjuna was arguing with Kṛṣṇa. This argument has no value because if I am imperfect, what is the meaning of my argument? Whatever I shall argue, that is also imperfect. So what is the use of wasting time by imperfect argument? This is not process. The process is that we must approach to a perfect person and take his instruction as it is. Then our knowledge is perfect. Without any argument. We accept Vedic knowledge like that. For example, just like stool of an animal. It is stated in the Vedic literature that it is impure. If you touch stool... According to Vedic system, even after passing my own stool, evacuating, I have to take bath. And what to speak of others' stool. That is the system. So stool is impure. One, after touching stool, he must take bath. This is Vedic injunction. But in another place it is said that the stool of the cow is pure, and if cow dung is applied in some impure place, it will be pure. Now, by your argument, you can say that "The stool of an animal is impure. Why it is said in one place pure and in another place impure? This is contradiction." But this is not contradiction. You practically make experiment. You take cow dung and apply anywhere, you'll find it is pure. Immediately purified. So this is Vedic injunction. They are perfect knowledge. We... Instead of wasting time arguing and putting forward false prestige, if you simply accept the perfect knowledge, as they are stated in the Vedic literature, then we get perfect knowledge and our life is success. Instead of making experiment on the body to find out where is the soul... The soul is there, but it is so small that it is not possible to see by your these blunt eyes. Any microscope or any machine, because it is stated it is one ten-thousandth part of the top of the tip of the hair. So there is no machine. You cannot see. But it is there. Otherwise, how we can find distinction between the dead body and the living body?
According to Vedic civilization, we don't accept any book written by rascal. We take, we accept the authority of the Vedas. What is stated there in the Vedas we accept, without any argument. For example... There are many examples. One of the example is that the Veda says that if you touch the stool of an animal, even your own stool... That is the system. In India still they are..., not in the city, but in the villages, you will see even ordinary man, he goes to pass stool in the field, and just after passing stool he will take bath just to purify himself, change his cloth. That is the śāstric injunction. In one place it is said that the stool of the cow is pure. Now if you argue that one place you say that the stool of an animal is impure, even your own stool if you touch you have to take bath, how is that another animal's stool is pure? This is superficially contradiction. But those who are following strictly the Vedic principles, they will accept that the stool of cow or cow dung is pure. Now, if you argue, "Why it is pure?" then you come to a modern chemical analysis, and you will find the cow dung is full of antiseptic properties. It has been examined in Calcutta by one doctor, Rajmohan(?) Bose. Therefore, the Vedic injunction is so perfect.
According to our Vedic principle, nobody has got the right to question anyone unless that person is accepted as spiritual master. Otherwise, it is waste of time. Spiritual... If you want to question somebody, you must accept his answer. You cannot argue. That is acceptance of authority. Just like in Vedas, whatever injunctions are there, we accept it without any argument. That is Vedic instruction. People sometimes say: "Is it Vedic instruction, that I have to accept it without argument?" Actually, that is Vedic instruction. Just like, for example, the Vedas says cow dung is pure. Now actually we are accepting, those who are following the Vedic principles, they accept cow dung as pure. Actually, it is pure. But if we argue: "How is that, that animal stool is impure, even human stool is impure. How cow dung, which is stool of another animal, is pure?" It is contrary. But actually, we accept. Actually we accept. Similarly, conchshell, conchshell is nothing but bone of an animal. According to our Vedic version, if you touch the bone of an animal, you become immediately impure. You have to take bath. But this bone of animal, conchshell, is taken to the Deity room.
Similarly, conchshell, conchshell is nothing but bone of an animal. According to our Vedic version, if you touch the bone of an animal, you become immediately impure. You have to take bath. But this bone of animal, conchshell, is taken to the Deity room. It is so pure. So from our human consciousness we find contradiction in the Vedic instruction, that in the Vedas, in one place, it says that the bone of an animal is impure; in another place says the bone of a particular animal is pure. The Vedas says the stool of an animal is impure, but in another place it says that the stool of the cow animal is pure. So apparently we find contradiction. But still, because we accept the authority of the Vedas, therefore we accept the statement also. We accept the bone of the conchshell, and we accept the stool of cow as pure. That is acceptance of authority. You cannot argue. Even though it appears it is contradictory, you cannot argue.
So Arjuna accepted Kṛṣṇa as spiritual master. In the beginning, he was talking like friend. Friend to friend, talking, sometimes it comes to nil, no conclusion, simply waste of time. It is called vitaṇḍā. That sort of argument has no value. Because it will never come into conclusion. But when we talk with authority, the spiritual master, representative of Kṛṣṇa, then we cannot argue. We have to accept. Guru-vākya. Guru-vākya, you cannot deny it. It may not be agreeable to you in the beginning, but you cannot deny it. That is it: system of Vedic system. Here Arjuna has accepted Kṛṣṇa as the spiritual master. Śiṣyas te aham. "I become Your disciple. Because we were talking till now as friends, but this will not decide the case. My case is very serious. My duty is to fight, but I do not like to fight. Some affection, some family relationship, is deterring me to fight, making me coward. So therefore it is a very complex position. And I find that You can make a solution of this complex position. I therefore accept You as my spiritual master. And I fall down under Your lotus feet as Your disciple." Śādhi māṁ prapannam. "I am surrendered. Now You kindly protect the surrendered soul."
So here Kṛṣṇa is instructing. First of all, He chastised Arjuna: aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase (BG 2.11). "My dear Arjuna, you are talking like a very learned man, but I find that you do not know in which case you have to lament and in which case you have to joyful. That you do not know." Gatāsūn agatāsūṁś ca nānuśocanti paṇḍitāḥ. Indirectly, He said that "You are not paṇḍita; you are a fool. Because you are arguing in this way that 'If I kill my brothers, their wives will be widow, and they will become prostitute and there will be varṇa-saṅkara.' " These questions are very nice. If women become prostitute, then the population is varṇa-saṅkara. And varṇa-saṅkara means unwanted children. They become practically nuisance in the society. Narakāyate. If varṇa-saṅkara population is increased, then the whole society becomes a hell. That's a fact. Actually, that is the position at the present moment. Therefore, according to the Vedic system, marriage is there. Without marriage, the population, increase of population, means varṇa-saṅkara.
That is their theory. But anyway, whatever that theory may be, at least in my present condition, I, my consciousness, is limited within this body. I cannot say that I am superconscious. Had I been superconscious, then the pains and pleasure going on (in) your body I would have felt. But because I am limited within this body, therefore the pains and pleasure of my body I can understand. Therefore my consciousness is limited. You cannot argue that you are the same... That will be explained. Kṛṣṇa says in the Thirteenth Chapter that kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi sarva-kṣetreṣu bhārata (BG 13.3). Kṣetra-jña, the soul, and, is within this body. Therefore soul is called kṣetra-jña. Kṣetra-jña means "one who knows about this body." I am conscious about my this body. You are conscious about your body. But Kṛṣṇa is conscious of your body and my body and everyone's body. Therefore He's also kṣetra-jña, but He's kṣetra-jña, He's Supersoul. Just the same example. Just like the sun, during meridian, is on your head. At 5,000 miles, you ask your friend "Where is the sun?" He'll also say, "It is on my head."
So we cannot estimate by direct perception, even in this material world, and what to speak of the spiritual world. Not (possible.) Panthās tu koṭi-śata-vatsara-sampragamyo vāyor athāpi manaso muni-puṅgavānām (Bs. 5.34). By mental, muni-puṅga means mental speculation. You can go on mental speculating, but if you do even for many hundreds and thousand of years, it is not possible to calculate. You have to accept this truth through the śāstra; otherwise, it is not possible. Therefore Kṛṣṇa said, nityasyoktāḥ śarīr-ukta. Ukta means it is said. Not that "I am presenting some dogma," although He can do so. He's Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is the method. Unless there is ukta, said by authorities, previous authorities, ācāryas, you cannot say anything. This is called paramparā. You try to understand with your intelligence, but you cannot make any addition or alteration. That is not possible. Therefore it is called nityasyoktāḥ. It is said, it is already settled. You cannot argue. Nityasyoktāḥ śarīriṇaḥ anāśino 'prameyasya, immeasurable.
Yes. As Arjuna has accepted. Arjuna was talking with Kṛṣṇa as friend, but he has accepted. Although he is friend, he has accepted Him as spiritual master. The significance is that as soon as you accept somebody as spiritual master, you cannot argue. You have to accept. You have to accept. Therefore the selection of spiritual (master) must be very scrutinizing. You cannot accept anyone as spiritual master. You must be very much satisfied that here is a person who can solve the problems of my life. Just like Arjuna thought. He plainly said that "The problem which is before me, I know, beyond You, besides You, nobody can make solution." That is the way of accepting spiritual master. When one is fully convinced that "Here is a person who can actually solve the problems of my life," then one should accept spiritual master. In the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa there is such process that one should accept a spiritual master after associating with him for some time. Similarly, the spiritual master also shall accept somebody as disciple after associating with him for some time, whether he is eligible or not. This is the process.
So our proposition is that to receive knowledge from Kṛṣṇa, the perfect person, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. We accept śāstra, means which is infallible. There is no mistake. Just like when I was walking near the cowshed, heaps of, piles of cow dung was there. So I was explaining to my followers that if such heaps of animal, I mean to say, man stool was heaped up here, nobody would come here. Nobody would come here. But the cow dung, there are so much heaps of cow dung, still, we find it pleasure to go through it. And in the Vedas it is said, "Cow dung is pure." This is called śāstra. If you argue, "How it can, it has become pure? It is an animal stool." But the Vedas, they... Because the knowledge is perfect, that even in argument we cannot prove how animal stool becomes pure, but it is pure. Therefore Vedic knowledge is perfect. And if we take knowledge from the Vedas, we save so much time for investigating, or researching. We are very much fond of research. Everything is there in the Vedas. Why do you waste your time?
So the basic principle of spiritual understanding is to know one's self. Ahaṁ brahmāsmi. Ahaṁ brahmāsmi. That, to come to that point, Kṛṣṇa is explaining that this body is like the dress, and the person who is dressed, that is within the dress. Dehino 'smin yathā dehe (BG 2.13). Here also, it is said, tathā śarīrāṇi vihāya jīrṇāny anyāni saṁyāti navāni dehī. Very simple thing. There is no difficulty. But the so-called scientists, philosophers, educationists, they will not believe that there is soul. They, they'll not believe. They'll simply argue. They cannot establish the real fact, how this body is moving. There are so many theories. But, except, accept, they will not accept that the..., actually, because the soul is within this body, everything is happening. And without the soul, immediately this body, so nice body of such and such great personality, becomes a lump of matter. Not that the body is working... They are finding out the brain substance, how it is working. But the brain substance is already there in the dead body. Why don't you work with that? No. That is not fact. The fact is the brain substance is a machine, but the man, or the person, is within the body. He's working with the brain substance. Just like you have got a nice machine. But it must be worked by somebody. At the present moment, the computer is a very subtle machine. But this computer cannot work without an experienced mechanic who pushes the button and it works. These people, they cannot understand that without spiritual touch, matter cannot work.
You must go to the university, you must go to the college. You must hear the experienced professor and learn it and practically experiment it. Then you can learn. Not that by purchasing a book you become a medical practitioner or lawyer. That is not possible. Therefore the direction is that tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet: (MU 1.2.12) "Must." Here also we see, Kṛṣṇa in the beginning was talking with Arjuna just like friends. But when Arjuna understood it that "We are talking like friends. So we cannot come into conclusion." The friend, they talk, they argue, they put logic. In that way, we cannot understand. Na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet. Then? Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet. So therefore Arjuna surrendered himself: śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ prapannam (BG 2.7). Kārpaṇya-doṣopahata-svabhāvaḥ. "I, I can understand that I am a kṣatriya. It is my duty to fight. But in front of my grandfather and relatives, I am declining to fight. Therefore I am affected with kārpaṇya-doṣa. I am deviating from my duty. So why I am deviating from this duty? Therefore I am surrendering myself unto You."
So that is going on. One body is created and the same body again annihilated, another body created, another body, the same body annihilated, and it is going on. So where is the cause of lamenting? You cannot stop. You cannot stop this process. Jātasya hi dhruvo mṛtyur dhruvaṁ janma mṛtasya ca tasmād aparihārye 'rthe. Duty. The same thing is going on. Duty is very important thing. Kṛṣṇa is stressing on it. One cannot stop his duty. Then he becomes sinful. That is karma-vāda. If, just like so many people, they argue that if we discharge our duties nicely, then where is the need of accepting God? The karma-vāda philosophy is that if there is God, then he's giving us the result of our activities, and if I do nicely, then He gives me nice opportunity, and if I do not do things very nicely, I am put into suffering. So there is a karma-phala-datta, decides... Just like the high-court judge, he is giving judgement according to the case, different cases. Similarly, our goodness or badness will be decided according to our karma. That is also fact. Then what is the use of accepting one God? If I do my duties very nicely, then He must give me nice result. Why shall I worship Him? Why shall I become a devotee of God? It is His duty. This is karma-vāda. Everyone is trying to avoid the principle of devotional service. It is only we, the Kṛṣṇa conscious persons, we are advocating the philosophy of Bhagavad-gītā, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). Kṛṣṇa says that "Always think of Me." These karma-vādīs, they will say, "Why shall I waste my time thinking of Kṛṣṇa? If I do my duty nicely then I will get good result. Why shall I be devotee of Kṛṣṇa?" This is their argument.
Yes. Durgā is the material energy. So Lord Śiva is directly connected with the material energy. Therefore he's less than Lord Viṣṇu. Viṣṇu is not directly related with the material energy. The example is given in the Brahma-saṁhitā. Just like milk, as soon as in touch with something sour, it becomes yogurt. The yogurt is nothing but milk, but in connection with some sour material, it is yogurt. So yogurt is milk, but it is not milk also. Your child requires milk. You cannot give yogurt. Nobody can argue, "Oh, yogurt is milk preparation, why not give?" No. It will be not beneficial for him. Similarly, if you want release from this material world, you have to take to Viṣṇu, no other demigod. If you want strength, then you have to drink milk, not yogurt. Yogurt, at times you can eat for some taste or some particular purpose. The milk is general drinking. Just take the statistics, how many bottles of milk are sold in the store and how many bottles of yogurt is sold. The yogurt and milk is the same thing. Why they'll demand milk and not the yogurt? Is that right? Yes. But nobody can put argument, "Oh, why do you take milk? Take the yogurt."
Then he'll be able to grasp what is spiritual life. Therefore restriction. But if from the very childhood, in the school, college, the boys and girls are allowed to enjoy sex life, then it is very difficult to understand or to enter into spiritual life. Bhogaiśvarya-prasaktānām. If we teach our children simply for sense enjoyment, how they can be spiritually advanced? The result will be confusion. Therefore in your country the hippies are there—confusion. They have been brought up in material sense enjoyment very nicely, but still, there is confusion, frustration, because he's hankering after something better. So that is spiritual happiness. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So one has to understand this point and voluntarily he has to accept this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, and then he'll find happiness. This is sure. Those who have taken to it, just ask them, just argue with them, and see actually. This is happiness. Yes.
Now, this "Yes, I shall fight", this "I", and the former "I"—"I shall not fight"—so there is vast difference. The former "I" is the representative of mental speculation, when Arjuna decided that "I shall not fight. They are my relatives, they are my brothers; I cannot fight with them for the matter of kingdom. Rather, I shall forego; I shall become a beggar. I shall... I don't want this kingdom." He argued like that. But after reading Bhagavad-gītā, he said that "My illusion is now removed." Naṣṭo mohaḥ smṛtir labdhā: "My illusion is now removed, and I have got my consciousness by Your mercy. By Your mercy."
So far the techniques are required, we are present. The books are there. The literature are there. The authorities are there. Simply we have to agree. "Yes." Yes man. Simply you have to agree, "Yes," henceforward we shall become karma-yogī. Then, from that very point, your life begins. Karma-yoga. The yes man. Mind that, that instead of saying no to Kṛṣṇa... Just like Arjuna said no in the beginning: "No, sir. I am not going to fight. You don't try to induce me, my dear Kṛṣṇa." He argued so many things with Kṛṣṇa. Then, at the last moment, he said, "Yes. I shall fight." So from "no man" to "yes man," that's all. So we have to agree. We are now "no men." We say everything about God, "no." Now we have to learn "yes."
It has been described in the Bhāgavata that tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ. If you want to establish religious truth, you cannot establish it by your logic and argument. It is not possible because I may be a very perfect religious man, but I may not be a very good arguer; another strong man who can argue very strongly, who knows logic very nicely, he can defeat me. He can make my all conclusion null and void. So therefore, simply by argument or logical conclusion one cannot reach to the truth, to the religious truth. It is not possible. Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnāḥ. Śrutayaḥ means revealed scriptures. Revealed scriptures. Just like in the world there are many revealed scriptures. There are Vedas, Purāṇas, the Bible, the Koran, and there are so many religious scriptures also. And if you go on reading them, although the aim is one, still, you will find some discrepancy from one to another. Śrutayo vibhinnāḥ. Vibhinnāḥ means they are diverse. They are diverse. Śrutayo vibhinnā nāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. And so far philosophers are concerned, one philosopher tries to defeat another philosopher. That is the philosophical way. So nāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām. Therefore this truth of religion is very confidential. Nihitaṁ guhāyām. Guhāyām means it is very confidential.
So therefore Kṛṣṇa advised Arjuna that avināśi tu tad viddhi yena sarvam idaṁ tatam: "Arjuna, My dear Arjuna, you have, so long you have spoken, you have argued with Me in so many ways, but such argument is not for, not to be entertained in learned circle. Now just try to be a learned man." And what is that? Now, avināśi tu tad viddhi yena sarvam idaṁ tatam: "You just try to understand. In your body there is some thing which is spread all over body, all over your body. And that is eternal. And what is that thing which is spread all over your body? That is your consciousness. Your consciousness."
So this instruction was first given to Arjuna, that "Arjuna! You are arguing with Me just like a very learned scholar, but you are fool number one, and you just try to understand this first of all, that that thing which is spread all over..." Avināśi tu tad viddhi yena sarvam idaṁ tatam. Yena sarvam idam. Sarvam means the whole body, idam. But your consciousness is not spread in others' bodies. You must know it. If you say that "My consciousness is spread all over the universe," that is also another mistake. Your consciousness is limited within your body. Just like my consciousness is limited within my body, your consciousness is limited within your body. And everyone... We are all living entities and we are, everyone, conscious, but our consciousness is limited. We should not falsely claim that "I am the supreme consciousness."
Now, the student goes to learn from the teacher A, B, C, D. The teacher says "This is A," but the student has to accept that this is A. The student cannot argue, "So why not this way?" That is not a student. When a teacher says that this A, so you have to accept this is A, you cannot argue. That is the relationship between the student and the teacher. A student cannot argue. The teacher says, "This is A," the student has to accept that is A. He cannot argue. If he argues, then he cannot learn. That is the first proposition.
Just like two lawyers are arguing in the court. The medium is the law court. So neither of them can deny the law court, but one has to establish his convictions by argument, by logic. So similarly, tat tvam asi is the code of Vedic principle or Vedas, "You are that." Tat tvam asi. Tat means that supreme spirit. "You are." So our philosophy, Vaiṣṇava philosophy, we begin from this point. As Kṛṣṇa began Bhagavad-gītā from the point that "You are not this body," we begin from this version, tat tvam asi. Tat tvam asi. "You are not this." That means "What I am?" Then I must be something; otherwise what is my identity? That reply is your identity is that "You are as good as God." That means you are qualitatively the same.
Now, we have received this news, very pleasing. Now next duty? Taj-joṣaṇāt. Now, if you little try to assimilate it. And what is that assimilation? Smaraṇam. Simply by thinking, "Oh, this has been spoken." Try to argue whether it is true or not. So you have to think over. Satāṁ prasaṅgān, taj-joṣaṇād āśv apavarga-vartmani. And if you do that... Suppose you hear something of the Bhagavad-gītā, and it appeals to you, or even does not appeal to you. Just try to think over: "What Bhagavad-gītā says? How Swamiji has discussed this matter?" Apply your arguments. Apply your logic. Don't take it as a sentiment or as a blind faith. You have got reason; you have got arguments; you have got sense. Apply it and try to understand it. Neither it is bogus. It is scientific. Then you will feel... Taj-joṣaṇād āśv apavarga-vartmani śraddhā ratir bhaktir anukramiṣyati. You will gradually develop your attachment for hearing it, and devotional service will be invoked in your heart, and then, gradually, you will make progress.
The example, as I gave you the other day, that a soldier is fighting and killing many enemies or killing many persons, but he is not responsible for killing. The same man, when he is not fighting for the country or for the government, if he kills one man, he is hanged. He is to be hanged. Try to understand. So because he is fighting or killing on the order of higher authority, the government, he is not responsible for all those killings. Rather sometimes he is recognized by giving some medal: "Oh, you have killed so many enemies. Very good." And similarly, if he kills outside the warfield, at home... That is also enemy. Nobody kills nobody unless the other is his enemy. But he will be hanged. If he argues in the court that "In the battlefield I killed so many enemies. I was given recognition. But at home I have killed only one enemy and for which I am going to be hanged. What is this law?" This argument will not stay. So for higher authority's order, if you do something, you are not responsible.
And the process is praṇipāta, praṇipātena. Praṇipāta means full surrender. Pra means prakṛṣṭa-rūpeṇa, fully, and nipāta means completely becoming a blank slate. Blank slate. Nobody should approach a bona fide spiritual master just to argue with him and just to, with a desire that "I shall see what kind of spiritual master." No. This is useless. You have to select a spiritual master...
My Guru Mahārāja, my spiritual master, used to say that you have to select a spiritual master not by seeing but by your ear, but by hearing. And you don't select a spiritual master who has got a very good hair or beard or some very beautiful feature, "Oh, he is a very good, nice looking." No. You must hear. Tad viddhi praṇipātena (BG 4.34). Śruti. The whole process is śruti. The Vedas are called śruti. The ear has to aural reception.
Yes. So cessation of material existence does not mean void. Because I am not void. I am spirit soul. If I was void, how my development of this body has taken place? I am not void. I am the seed. Just like you sow a seed on the ground, it grows into large tree or plant. Similarly the seed is given by the father in the womb of the mother and it grows like a tree. And this body is that. Where is voidness? Ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā (BG 14.4). In the Fourteenth Chapter you'll see that originally the seed was given by Kṛṣṇa in the womb of this material nature and so many living entities are coming out. You cannot argue against it because actually the generation is the same process as in our practical life we see the father gives the seed in the womb of the mother and the mother, I mean to say, nourishes the child to grow body. So there is no question of void. If the seed would have been void, how this nice body has developed?
You'll be surprised to know that Haridāsa Ṭhākura... We always glorify him after our kīrtana, "Haridāsa Ṭhākura ki jaya." This Haridāsa Ṭhākura, how he was undisturbed. There are many instances. Lord Jesus Christ, he was also undisturbed when he was being crucified. So similarly, this Haridāsa Ṭhākura, he happened to be a Muhammadan and he joined this Hare Kṛṣṇa movement. So the Muhammadan magistrate called him, "Oh, you are born in such a nice family and you are chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa? Hindu? You are chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hindu's name? Then what is your explanation?" So Haridāsa Ṭhākura was... He could understand that he is now in dangerous position. So he replied, "Sir, many Hindus also have become Muhammadan. So if some Muhammadan becomes Hindu, what is the harm?" "Oh, you are arguing?" Means he was to be punished. Give the dog a bad name and hang it.
My policy is following the footstep of Rūpa Gosvāmī. He says that somehow or other, let them become first of all attached to Kṛṣṇa. So this is the yoga. Kṛṣṇa is explaining, mayy āsakta-manāḥ pārtha. So try to be attached to Kṛṣṇa. And why you shall not be attached to Kṛṣṇa? So many nice things in Kṛṣṇa consciousness? We have got arts, we have painting, we have got dancing, we have got music, we have got first-class food, we have got first-class dress, first-class health, everything first class. It is only the foolish rascal that he'll not be attached to these first-class things. Everything. And it is easy at the same time. What is the reason that one should not be attached to this process? The reason is that he's a first-class rascal. That's all. I tell you frankly. Let anyone come, argue with me whether he's not a first-class rascal by not accepting Kṛṣṇa consciousness. I'll prove it.
So this is the first business, that "Where we shall take knowledge?" Tad-vijñānārtham. Vedic lesson is that tad-vijñānārthaṁ gurum eva abhigacchet: "You should go to guru." Just like Arjuna has accepted Kṛṣṇa as guru. When Arjuna was puzzled, he surrendered to Kṛṣṇa. Śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ prapannam: (BG 2.7) "I am kṣatriya. It is my duty to fight, but I am declining. Although You are requesting me to fight, still I am declining. So I am puzzled. Anyway, I can understand You can drive away my, this puzzling position. Therefore I am becoming Your śiṣya." Śiṣyas te 'ham. "I become Your disciple. I am not going to argue with You on equal footing." Śiṣya means he is always subordinate. Whatever the guru will say, he will accept. That is the guru and śiṣya. So Kṛṣṇa became guru and Arjuna became a śiṣya, disciple, not friend. Of course, he knew what is Kṛṣṇa. So śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ prapannam. So similarly, we have to find out guru for perfect instruction. That is the only way. Otherwise we shall keep ourself in ignorance, in mistake, in illusion, in imperfectness and so many other things.
So that requires little intelligence. It does not require many, many births. It requires little intelligence. Take to this Kṛṣṇa consciousness seriously; your problems are solved. Now, if you don't believe in it, then come to argument, come to philosophy, come to reason. Go on arguing. There are volumes of books. You can be convinced. You can learn it. Every answer is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. You can try to understand it with your reason, with your arguments. It is open. (break) ...like Arjuna. Arjuna was taught Bhagavad-gītā, how much time? At most, within half an hour. Because he was very intelligent. This Bhagavad-gītā, the people of the world are reading. Very, very learned scholar, wise men, they are reading. They are trying to understand, giving different interpretation. And there are thousands of edition, commentaries. But Arjuna was intelligent; he understood it within half an hour.
The śāstra says that knowledge... Because our receptive power of knowledge is very limited... We are not perfect. Our senses are not perfect. Therefore whatever we acquire by these blunt senses, they cannot be perfect. The direction is, therefore, tarkaḥ apratiṣṭhaḥ: "If you want to reach to the ultimate conclusion simply by arguments and speculation, that is not possible." Because argumentative power is a special gift. Suppose you can argue very nicely. That's all. I cannot. But somebody may come—he's more powerful in arguments. He can defeat you. So don't depend on your speculative function or arguments. Don't depend on that. They're all imperfect. Tarkaḥ apratiṣṭhaḥ. These are the directions of higher authorities.
Everything, Kṛṣṇa..., Arjuna wanted to know from Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa, he has accepted Kṛṣṇa as the spiritual master, and spiritual master means the authority. Unless you accept somebody as quite fit for becoming your authority, he cannot become a spiritual master. You must be satisfied by the authoritative statement of the spiritual master. You cannot argue. That is the principle of authority. Adhidaivam, the demigods. The demigods, they are controlling the universal affairs. Just like for rain, water supply, Indradeva, the demigod known as Indra, he is in charge. For heat and light, the demigod Sūryadeva, he's in charge. Similarly, the moon, Candradeva... They are all devas, demigods. He's in charge of, what is called, activating the vegetables, the moon, activating the vegetables. In this way, all these demigods have got different power invested upon them by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. They are agents. They are called demigods, Indra, Candra... There are thirty-three crores of demigods, and they are controlling our activities also. The astronomy means the astral influence upon us. And according to the astral influence, we act. Therefore horoscope is made. At the time of birth, a person's situation according to different astral influence, and then the astrology science can make his horoscope, his future activities, his future hopes. Everything is done. Adhibhūtam.
There are the four original Vedas, Sāma, Yajur, Ṛk, Atharva, and then the Upaniṣad, then the essence of Vedic knowledge, Vedānta-sūtra, then Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata... Mahābhārata is the greater history of this planet, Bhārata. In this way immense literature are available. If we like, we can read them. We are presenting in English translation so many books. The purpose is people of the world may know the Vedic knowledge. So essence of Vedic knowledge is this Bhagavad-gītā. Not only that, it is being spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore it is said, śrī-bhagavān uvāca, so nobody could argue.
Vedic knowledge means you cannot argue. You have to accept authoritative. Just like the government literature, government regulation, when it is published, gazette, you cannot argue. Whatever the government has decided, you have to accept because government is the authority. Similarly, Vedic knowledge means you cannot argue. You can argue, but that argument is not to defeat. That argument is for understanding. Tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā (BG 4.34). If you cannot understand, then you have to put questions very humbly, praṇipātena, not by challenging. Praṇipāta. Praṇipāta means very humbly submitting oneself. Praṇipātena paripraśna. Otherwise there is no need of questioning. If you have no praṇipāta... Praṇipāta means prakṛṣṭa-rūpeṇa nipātena, fully submissive. The answers... You should approach to a person, questioning, with praṇipāta, means you cannot challenge him. Whatever answer he gives, you must be prepared to accept it. Otherwise don't put question. That is the system, Vedic system. Tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena (BG 4.34). First of all you cannot argue because it is settled fact. Vinirṇītam.
Just like some law is passed after much discussion in the legislative assembly, but when the law is passed, enacted, you cannot argue anymore. "Under such and such law you have to do this section." Then you cannot argue. Similarly, Vedic knowledge, it is nirṇītam. It is already established. Simply you have to know it submissively. If you are lacking in that submissiveness, then don't put question. That will be simply waste of time. That is Vedic system. First of all you should approach a person whom you think that he is the right person; he can give the answer. Then you put question. If you have doubt that "This man may be or may not be able to answer my question," then don't put question because you are not prepared to take his answer. Therefore here it is said, bhagavān uvāca. You cannot put any question. That is the way.
So this is the question of faith. This is the question of faith. And without faith, you cannot reach the kingdom of God. Your experimental knowledge, your so-called defective reasons and arguments and philosophy, that will not be applicable in the transcendental field. You have to believe. You are believing in every sphere of your life. When you purchase a ticket for transferring yourself in the aeroplane, if you go on arguing, "Sir, I am purchasing ticket. Whether this aeroplane will reach? Whether it will not, I mean to say, crash on the way?" If you go on arguing, there is no question of, I mean to say, getting on the aeroplane. You have to believe that "Aeroplane will take me to the other side." You are doing that. There is no argument.
Sarva-loka-maheśvaram (BG 5.29). And He is the proprietor. He is the master. He is the proprietor of all planets, either in this material world or in the spiritual world. Sarva-loka-maheśvaram. Asammūḍhaḥ. Not by... Not accepting blindly. Don't accept blindly. You have got... God has given you power of reasoning, power of arguments. But don't argue falsely.
There is no use of interpretation. Interpretation is required when you cannot understand one statement. In the law court if one statement is ambiguous then two parties argue on it. "I think it is this," "I think..." But when it is clear there is no question of interpretation. Unfortunately the Bhagavad-gītā is being interpreted by unauthorized persons unnecessarily, and people are kept into darkness. We are trying to protest against this process.
Therefore śāstra says, acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet. Acintya, which is inconceivable, beyond your sense perception, don't try to argue and understand it and speculate. This is foolishness. It is not possible. Therefore we have to go to the guru. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet, samit-pāṇiḥ śrotriyaṁ brahma-niṣṭham (MU 1.2.12). This is the process. But the demons, they do not know, this process. They speculate; they manufacture. Simply by jugglery of words they manufacture their truth. No. Satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi. That is in the big Bhāgavatam. You'll find. And what is satyam? Janmādy asya yato 'nvayād itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ svarāṭ tene brahma hṛdā... (SB 1.1.1). Everything is there.
| Page Title: | Argue (Lectures, BG) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 06 of Mar, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=52, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 52 |