Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Conclusion of... (Letters)

Correspondence

1947 to 1965 Correspondence

Letter to Raja Mohendra Pratap -- Cawnpore 13 July, 1947:

Besides you have not quoted any authority for all your statements. So it is more or less dogmatic. If different men put different dogmatic views about religion and its essentials who is to be accepted and who is not be? Therefore the approach shall be and must be authoritative, scientific and universal. Your delineations do not conform to all these necessary things. That is my main contention. If you have time to discuss on it, I shall be glad to substantiate my contentions as far as possible. My basis of arguments will be Bhagavad-gita which is the most authoritative, scientific and universal. To summarise the conclusions of Bhagavad-gita it may be said that,

1) God is one and everything is in Him and He is in everything.

2) To render transcendental service unto God is to serve everything that be, just like to water the root of the tree is to water the different branches and numerous leaves of the tree or to supply food to the stomach is to vitalize all the senses and the sense organs of the body.

3) The parts are automatically served when the Whole is served but when the parts are served the whole may not be served or not served at all.

4) The parts and the Whole being eternally related, it is the eternal duty of the parts to render service unto the Whole.

5) A recipient of the services of the parts, God's sat-cit-ananda vigraha i.e. the all-attractive Cognizant and all-blissful Personality eternal. He can reveal Himself by His own potency without any help of the external potency called maya in order to be cognizable by the limited potency of the parts and as such He is not only the greatest of all but he is the smallest of all. That is His prerogative.

6) He is better realized when He by His causeless mercy agrees to descend in this mortal world but he He is never realized by the partial speculations of the empiric philosophers however systematic and long-termed it may be.

7) Sri Krishna is the Personality of Godhead and is the Summum Bonum Cause of all Causes proved by fact and figures in the statement of Bhagavad-gita, but He reserves the right of not being exposed to the sensual speculations of the empiric philosophers.

8) One should therefore surrender unto Him if one wants to know Him as He is and that is the real process to approach the Infinite by the infinitesimals.

9) Sri Krishna is easily available by the religion of love i.e. by love and service as conceived by the damsels of Vraja who had practically no education whatsoever and much less any claim for high class birth right.

10) The highest service that can be rendered to the mankind is, therefore, to preach the philosophy and religion of Bhagavad-gita for all the times, all the places and all the people.

I hope you may agree with me and thus make a combined effort in this direction for the benefit of the mankind.

Letter to Sir -- Calcutta May 1949:

On the conclusion of the All Religious Conference held at Bombay very recently, I may submit that nothing practical has come out of it for uniting the different faiths of the world. The practical solution is lying in the transcendental message of Sri Krishna the Personality of Godhead as given by Him lately in the Bhagavad-gita.

In this sacred philosophical discourse the Supreme Godhead declares Himself as the begetting Father who impregnates the seeds of living entities in the womb of Mother Nature who in turn gives birth all varieties of living species. So the plain truth is that the Supreme Godhead is the Father, the Nature is the Supreme Mother and all living entities so many children of Almighty Father Godhead and the Mother Nature. The whole arrangement is therefore a family unit and one should wonder as to why there is so much anomaly in this universal family affair.

Letter to Sri Padampat Singhania -- Kanpur 7 May, 1957:

The Vedas say that bone is untouchable but the conchshell which is also a bone is perfectly pure. For the common man the statements of the Vedas appear to be contradictory. But in spite of such contradiction, because we Hindus accept the Vedas as authority we accept cow dung as pure and allow it to be used even in the kitchen. So also we accept the conchshell. The conchshell is after all a bone of an animal but because it is accepted by the Vedas we allow conchshell to be used in the sanctified room of our family deity. If we examine in the physical laboratory or analyse it by chemical test we won't find any difference between the stool of a man and that of a cow or the bone of an ox and that of a conch. And yet the whole Hindu Muslim conflict, the whole struggle of Gandhi and Jinnah and the whole question of Kashmir problem in the UNSCO have arisen from this petty difference of bones only. In the Hindu temple the bone conchshell is already there but as soon as a Muhammadan throws a piece of bone of the ox in the temple—the whole trouble began, resulting in the partition of India and Pakistan. So an impartial mundane student who will enter into the research work of such bone affairs in the annals of Indian History—surely he will come to the conclusion of unrestricted obedience to the words of the Vedas or that of the Koran or that of the Bible that lead to all sorts of Jehad and crusade. As a matter of fact the so called intelligent persons of the modern age have taken the shelter of secularism on the strength of past unfortunate religious feuds. This is another type of nonsense.

Letter to Dr. Y. G. Naik M.Sc., Ph.D -- Delhi 28 March, 1960:
Your letter dated 20 March 1960 redirected from my Hd Qrs. (Vrindaban) is duly in hand and I am very much encouraged to go through the contents which are full of valuable informations. The subject matter discussed in my article under reference is authorized as far as it refers to the conclusion of Geeta. I may also inform you that my concept of anti-matter is exactly what you call it anti-material. Technically it may be that I could not express the exact word used by the physicist but I have tried to explain the word anti-matter in the light and sense of what you say as anti-material which is spirit. But spirit is not apara as you have pointed out. In the Bhagavad-gita The Supreme Truth or the Absolute Personality of Godhead is the transcendental purusha and the two energies namely para and apara are emanations from Him.
Letter to Dr. Y. G. Naik M.Sc., Ph.D -- Delhi 28 March, 1960:

I am glad to note that you have got the highest estimation for Gita. I am just trying to present the conclusion of Gita to the world as it is and without any imperfect compromise with speculative interpretations. We have to learn the lessons of Gita from the authorized disciplic succession as it is advised there in the book (4th Ch.). Unfortunately every one not in that line tries to explain Gita in his own way and this process is misguided the people. We have to counteract this disruptive tendency and put them at right.

1968 Correspondence

Letter to Satsvarupa -- Los Angeles 18 November, 1968:

I am in due receipt of your letter dated Nov. 16, 1968, and it is very encouraging that Devananda is combating with Mr. Jarvis representing Maharishi Mahesa. Yes, in each and every such meeting you should go and challenge these persons, but you must be equipped very strongly with conclusions of the Bhagavad-gita. In the Bhagavad-gita it is clearly said that the first class yogi is he who has in his heart always the eternal form of Krishna. I could not follow what Devananda said to the Jerry Jarvis when he said that he was also worshiping Krishna. It is very good to argue with him even at the suspension of meetings, and it is very good enthusiasm.

1969 Correspondence

Letter to Kirtanananda -- Los Angeles 25 January, 1969:

Regarding your question about the disciplic succession coming down from Arjuna, it is just like I have got my disciples, so in the future these many disciples may have many branches of disciplic succession. So in one line of disciples we may not see another name coming from a different line. But this does not mean that person whose name does not appear was not in the disciplic succession. Narada was the Spiritual Master of Vyasadeva, and Arjuna was Vyasadeva's disciple, not as initiated disciple but there was some blood relation between them. So there is connection in this way, and it is not possible to list all such relationships in the short description given in Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Another point is that disciplic succession does not mean one has to be directly a disciple of a particular person. The conclusions which we have tried to explain in our Bhagavad-gita As It Is is the same as those conclusions of Arjuna. Arjuna accepted Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and we also accept the same truth under the disciplic succession of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another. This is an axiomatic truth. So there is no difference of opinion of understanding Krishna between ourselves and Arjuna. Another example is that a tree has many branches, and you will find one leaf here and another leaf there. But if you take this leaf and the other leaf and you press them both, you will see that the taste is the same. The taste is the conclusion, and from the taste you can understand that both leaves are from the same tree.

Letter to Dinesh -- Tittenhurst 31 October, 1969:

I beg to thank you for your letter dated October 21, 1969 along with a contribution of $25. I have already acknowledged receipt of your new record. Regarding the disciplic succession coming from Arjuna, disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially. Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion. Arjuna was a disciple of Krishna and Brahma was also a disciple of Krishna. Thus there is no disagreement between the conclusions of Brahma and Arjuna. Vyasadeva is in the disciplic succession of Brahma. The teachings to Arjuna was recorded by Vyasadeva verbatim. So according to the axiomatic truth, things equal to one another are equal to each other. We are not exactly directly from Vyasadeva, but our Gurudeva is a representative of Vyasadeva. Because Vyasadeva and Arjuna are of equal status, being students of Krishna, therefore we are in the disciplic succession of Arjuna. Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another.

1970 Correspondence

Letter to Professor J. F. Staal -- Los Angeles 30 January, 1970:
By devotional service, by understanding well what is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, anyone who goes to His Abode never comes back again to this material condition. How is it possible? The answer is, simply by chanting His name constantly. This is accepted by the exemplary disciple, Arjuna, who has perfectly learned the conclusion of spiritual science from the Yogisvara, master of mystic knowledge, Krishna, recognizing Krishna to be the Supreme Brahman, Arjuna addresses Him: "Sthane Hrsikesa . . ." (B.G. 11:36)—"the world becomes joyful hearing Your Names; and thus do all become attached to You." The process of chanting is herein authorized as the direct means of contacting the Supreme Absolute Truth the Personality of Godhead. Simply by chanting the Holy Name, Krishna, the soul is attracted by the Supreme Person, Krishna, for going home, back to Godhead.
Letter to Rupanuga -- Los Angeles 15 June, 1970:

So it was Krsna's grace that He saved you from a dangerous position. This dangerous position is dangerous if it does not go away after its appearance for a while. But if it goes away, then it is friend. A devotee's angle of vision being that everything is emanating from the Supreme, danger is not danger—that is the conclusion of Srimad-Bhagavatam. A devotee takes danger as also mercy of Krsna because in everything there is a purpose of Krsna and without His sanction nothing can take place.

1973 Correspondence

Letter to Sir Alistair Hardy -- Bhaktivedanta Manor 28 July, 1973:

So all these problems are due only to a lack of God consciousness. Therefore is you can actually help people to know about the supreme powerful that will be a great help. But I see that your method is not very satisfactory. You are making research by accepting the statements of common peoples expression of religious sentiment. There is no need of research, the result of research in this matter is already there perfectly presented in Bhagavad-gita, all we have to do is accept it and the whole problem of research is solved. You want to establish your conclusion of religious experience by taking the opinions of laymen. A laymans sentimental expression about religious problems is not a practical understanding of religious problems. Religion as we have explained means the orders of God, therefore it must be scientifically studied, what are his orders, how to abide by them. Simply by taking statistics of the sentiments of common men we cannot come to the right conclusion.

1975 Correspondence

Letter to Radhavallabha -- Vrndavana 21 September, 1975:

Regarding 6th Canto, Nitai has just yesterday sent off Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8 and next week he expects to send off Chapters 9 through 13. This will be sufficient for you to publish one volume. I expect before leaving India on September 30th to have finished the 6th Canto. I have received a letter from Jayadvaita das dated September 8th regarding the Upadesamrta book. The title of the book can be Nectar of Instruction. We already have the Nectar of Devotion so now you will have the Nectar of Instruction. You can make it just like the set-up of the Nectar of Devotion book. The words Sri Upadesamrta do not have to appear in the title. A dedication is not required because it is not a big book. The suggestion for the picture of Rupa Gosvami's Govindaji Temple is approved. Regarding the conclusion of the book, yes, it says in the text that the most fortunate devotees execute devotional service near Radha-kunda. That is stated in the book. I am enclosing the introduction for the book; please find.

Page Title:Conclusion of... (Letters)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, Serene
Created:18 of Feb, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=12
No. of Quotes:12