The conditioned soul is always overpowered by the modes of material nature, and consequently he is simply concerned with material benefits and auspicious and inauspicious material things. In other words, the mind, which is the leader of the senses, is absorbed in material activities life after life. Thus he continuously gets different types of bodies and suffers miserable material conditions. On the basis of mental concoction, social behavior has been formulated. If one's mind is absorbed in these activities, he certainly remains conditioned within the material world. According to different opinions, there are eleven or twelve mental activities, which can be transformed into hundreds and thousands. A person who is not Kṛṣṇa conscious is subjected to all these mental concoctions and is thus governed by the material energy. The living entity who is free from mental concoctions attains the platform of pure spirit soul, devoid of material contamination.
Different opinions
Expressions researched:
"difference of opinion"
|"difference of opinions"
|"difference of scientists' opinion"
|"differences of opinion"
|"different matah, opinion"
|"different opinion"
|"different opinions"
|"opinion different"
|"opinions different"
Bhagavad-gita As It Is
BG Chapters 13 - 18
There are many activities in the Vedic literature which are subjects of contention. For instance, it is said that an animal can be killed in a sacrifice, yet some maintain that animal killing is completely abominable. Although animal killing in a sacrifice is recommended in the Vedic literature, the animal is not considered to be killed. The sacrifice is to give a new life to the animal. Sometimes the animal is given a new animal life after being killed in the sacrifice, and sometimes the animal is promoted immediately to the human form of life. But there are different opinions among the sages. Some say that animal killing should always be avoided, and others say that for a specific sacrifice it is good. All these different opinions on sacrificial activity are now being clarified by the Lord Himself.
O best of the Bhāratas, now hear My judgment about renunciation. O tiger among men, renunciation is declared in the scriptures to be of three kinds.
Although there are differences of opinion about renunciation, here the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, gives His judgment, which should be taken as final. After all, the Vedas are different laws given by the Lord. Here the Lord is personally present, and His word should be taken as final. The Lord says that the process of renunciation should be considered in terms of the modes of material nature in which it is performed.
Srimad-Bhagavatam
SB Canto 1
Because the Lord's appearance in this material world is bewildering, there are different opinions about the birth of the Unborn. In the Bhagavad-gītā the Lord says that He takes His birth in the material world, although He is the Lord of all creations and He is unborn. So there cannot be any denial of the birth of the Unborn because He Himself establishes the truth. But still there are different opinions as to why He takes His birth. That is also declared in the Bhagavad-gītā. He appears by His own internal potency to reestablish the principles of religion and to protect the pious and to annihilate the impious. That is the mission of the appearance of the Unborn.
O greatest among human beings, it is very difficult to ascertain the particular miscreant who has caused our sufferings, because we are bewildered by all the different opinions of theoretical philosophers.
SB Canto 3
The Lord is everywhere, in both the material and spiritual domains, and He appears for the sake of His devotees when there is friction between His devotee and the nondevotee. As electricity is generated by friction of matter anywhere and everywhere, the Lord, being all-pervading, appears because of the friction of devotees and nondevotees. When Lord Kṛṣṇa appears on a mission, all His plenary portions accompany Him. When He appeared as the son of Vasudeva, there were differences of opinion about His incarnation. Some said, "He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Some said, "He is an incarnation of Nārāyaṇa," and others said, "He is the incarnation of Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu." But actually He is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead—kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28)—and Nārāyaṇa, the puruṣas and all other incarnations accompany Him to function as different parts of His pastimes. Mahad-aṁśa-yuktaḥ indicates that He is accompanied by the puruṣas, who create the mahat-tanva. It is confirmed in the Vedic hymns, mahāntaṁ vibhum ātmānam.
SB Canto 4
Among Vaiṣṇavas there may be some difference of opinion due to everyone's personal identity, but despite all personal differences, the cult of Kṛṣṇa consciousness must go on. We can see that under the instructions of Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī Mahārāja began preaching the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement in an organized way within the past hundred years. The disciples of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī Mahārāja are all Godbrothers, and although there are some differences of opinion, and although we are not acting conjointly, every one of us is spreading this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement according to his own capacity and producing many disciples to spread it all over the world. As far as we are concerned, we have already started the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, and many thousands of Europeans and Americans have joined this movement. Indeed, it is spreading like wildfire. The cult of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, based on the nine principles of devotional service (śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam/ arcanaṁ vandanaṁ dāsyaṁ sakhyam ātma-nivedanam (SB 7.5.23)), will never be stopped. It will go on without distinction of caste, creed, color or country. No one can check it.
Since the sons of King Prācīnabarhiṣat were all united in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, the Lord was very pleased with them. Each and every one of the sons of King Prācīnabarhiṣat was an individual soul, but they were united in offering transcendental service to the Lord. The unity of the individual souls attempting to satisfy the Supreme Lord or rendering service to the Lord is real unity. In the material world such unity is not possible. Even though people may officially unite, they all have different interests. In the United Nations, for instance, all the nations have their particular national ambitions, and consequently they cannot be united. Disunity between individual souls is so strong within this material world that even in a society of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, members sometimes appear disunited due to their having different opinions and leaning toward material things. Actually, in Kṛṣṇa consciousness there cannot be two opinions. There is only one goal: to serve Kṛṣṇa to one's best ability. If there is some disagreement over service, such disagreement is to be taken as spiritual. Those who are actually engaged in the service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead cannot be disunited in any circumstance. This makes the Supreme Personality of Godhead very happy and willing to award all kinds of benediction to His devotees, as indicated in this verse. We can see that the Lord is immediately prepared to award all benedictions to the sons of King Prācīnabarhiṣat.
SB Canto 5
In the Purāṇas there are two different opinions concerning Lord Rāmacandra. In the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta (5.34-36) this is confirmed in the description of the incarnation of Manu.
- vāsudevādi-rūpāṇām
- avatārāḥ prakīrtitāḥ
- viṣṇu-dharmottare rāma-
- lakṣmaṇādyāḥ kramādamī
- pādme tu rāmo bhagavān
- nārāyaṇa itīritaḥ
- śeṣaś cakraṁ ca śaṅkhaś ca
- kramāt syur lakṣmaṇādayaḥ
- madhya-deśa-sthitāyodhyā-
- pure 'sya vasatiḥ smṛtā
- mahā-vaikuṇṭhaloke ca
- rāghavedrasya kīrtitā
The Viṣṇu-dharmottara describes that Lord Rāmacandra and His brothers—Lakṣmaṇa, Bharata and Śatrughna—are incarnations of Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha respectively. The Padma Purāṇa, however, says that Lord Rāmacandra is an incarnation of Nārāyaṇa and that the other three brothers are incarnations of Śeṣa, Cakra and Śaṅkha. Therefore Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has concluded, tad idaṁ kalpa-bhedenaiva sambhāvyam. In other words, these opinions are not contradictory. In some millenniums Lord Rāmacandra and His brothers appear as incarnations of Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha, and in other millenniums They appear as incarnations of Nārāyaṇa, Śeṣa, Cakra and Śaṅkha. The residence of Lord Rāmacandra on this planet is Ayodhyā. Ayodhyā City is still existing in the district of Faizabad, which is situated on the northern side of Uttar Pradesh.
SB Canto 6
The Kalki avatāra is the fierce incarnation who vanquishes the class of the atheists born in this age of Kali. Now, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, many irreligious principles are in effect, and as Kali-yuga advances, many pseudo religious principles will certainly be introduced, and people will forget the real religious principles enunciated by Lord Kṛṣṇa before the beginning of Kali-yuga, namely principles of surrender unto the lotus feet of the Lord. Unfortunately, because of Kali-yuga, foolish people do not surrender to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. Even most people who claim to belong to the Vedic system of religion are actually opposed to the Vedic principles. Every day they manufacture a new type of dharma on the plea that whatever one manufactures is also a path of liberation. Atheistic men generally say, yata mata tata patha. According to this view, there are hundreds and thousands of different opinions in human society, and each opinion is a valid religious principle. This philosophy of rascals has killed the religious principles mentioned in the Vedas, and such philosophies will become increasingly influential as Kali-yuga progresses. In the last stage of Kali-yuga, Kalkideva, the fierce incarnation of Keśava, will descend to kill all the atheists and will save only the devotees of the Lord.
SB Canto 7
In political affairs, when a person disobediently agitates against the government, four principles are used to suppress him—legal orders, pacification, the offer of a post, or, finally, weapons. When there are no other arguments, he is punished. In logic, this is called argumentum ad baculum. When the two seminal brāhmaṇas Ṣaṇḍa and Amarka failed to extract from Prahlāda Mahārāja the cause for his having opinions different from those of his father, they called for a stick with which to chastise him to satisfy their master, Hiraṇyakaśipu. Because Prahlāda had become a devotee, they considered him to be contaminated by bad intelligence and to be the worst descendant in the family of demons. As it is said, where ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise. In a society or family in which everyone is a demon, for someone to become a Vaiṣṇava is certainly folly. Thus Prahlāda Mahārāja was charged with bad intelligence because he was among demons, including his teachers, who were supposedly brāhmaṇas.
In this verse, Hiraṇyakaśipu inquires from his son what he has learned from his guru. Prahlāda Mahārāja's gurus were of two kinds—Ṣaṇḍa and Amarka, the sons of Śukrācārya in the seminal disciplic succession, were the gurus appointed by his father, but his other guru was the exalted Nārada Muni, who had instructed Prahlāda when Prahlāda was within the womb of his mother. Prahlāda Mahārāja responded to the inquiry of his father with the instructions he had received from his spiritual master, Nārada. Thus there was again a difference of opinion because Prahlāda Mahārāja wanted to relate the best thing he had learned from his spiritual master, whereas Hiraṇyakaśipu expected to hear about the politics and diplomacy Prahlāda had learned from Ṣaṇḍa and Amarka. Now the dissension between the father and son became increasingly intense as Prahlāda Mahārāja began to say what he had learned from his guru Nārada Muni.
Persons who are strongly entrapped by the consciousness of enjoying material life, and who have therefore accepted as their leader or guru a similar blind man attached to external sense objects, cannot understand that the goal of life is to return home, back to Godhead, and engage in the service of Lord Viṣṇu. As blind men guided by another blind man miss the right path and fall into a ditch, materially attached men led by another materially attached man are bound by the ropes of fruitive labor, which are made of very strong cords, and they continue again and again in materialistic life, suffering the threefold miseries.
Since there must always be a difference of opinion between demons and devotees, Hiraṇyakaśipu, when criticized by his son Prahlāda Mahārāja, should not have been surprised that Prahlāda Mahārāja differed from his way of life. Nonetheless, Hiraṇyakaśipu was extremely angry and wanted to rebuke his son for deriding his teacher or spiritual master, who had been born in the brāhmaṇa family of the great ācārya Śukrācārya. The word śukra means "semen," and ācārya refers to a teacher or guru. Hereditary gurus, or spiritual masters, have been accepted everywhere since time immemorial, but Prahlāda Mahārāja declined to accept such a seminal guru or take instruction from him. An actual guru is śrotriya, one who has heard or received perfect knowledge through paramparā, the disciplic succession. Therefore Prahlāda Mahārāja did not recognize a seminal spiritual master. Such spiritual masters are not at all interested in Viṣṇu.
The impersonal Brahman is Kṛṣṇa Himself because Kṛṣṇa is the source of the impersonal Brahman. He is the origin of the transcendental bliss sought by great saintly persons, yet He, the Supreme Person, is your most dear friend and constant well-wisher and is intimately related to you as the son of your maternal uncle. Indeed, He is always like your body and soul. He is worshipable, yet He acts as your servant and sometimes as your spiritual master.
There is always a difference of opinion about the Absolute Truth. One class of transcendentalists concludes that the Absolute Truth is impersonal, and another class concludes that the Absolute Truth is a person. In Bhagavad-gītā, the Absolute Truth is accepted as the Supreme Person. Indeed, that Supreme Person Himself, Lord Kṛṣṇa, instructs in Bhagavad-gītā, brahmaṇo hi pratiṣṭhāham (BG 14.27), mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). "The impersonal Brahman is My partial manifestation, and there is no truth superior to Me." That same Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, acted as the supreme friend and relative of the Pāṇḍavas, and sometimes He even acted as their servant by carrying a letter from the Pāṇḍavas to Dhṛtarāṣṭra and Duryodhana. Because Kṛṣṇa was the well-wisher of the Pāṇḍavas, He also acted as guru by becoming the spiritual master of Arjuna. Arjuna accepted Kṛṣṇa as his spiritual master (śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ tvāṁ prapannam (BG 2.7)), and Kṛṣṇa sometimes chastised him. For example, the Lord said, aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase: (BG 2.11) "while speaking learned words, you are mourning for what is not worthy of grief." The Lord also said, kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ viṣame samupasthitam: "My dear Arjuna, how have these impurities come upon you?" Such was the intimate relationship between the Pāṇḍavas and Kṛṣṇa. In the same way, a pure devotee of the Lord is always with Kṛṣṇa through thick and thin; his way of life is Kṛṣṇa. This is the statement of the authority Śrī Nārada Muni.
SB Canto 8
The demons thought that the front of the snake was auspicious and that catching hold of that portion would be more chivalrous. Moreover, Daityas must always do the opposite of the demigods. That is their nature. We have actually seen this in relation to our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are advocating cow protection and encouraging people to drink more milk and eat palatable preparations made of milk, but the demons, just to protest such proposals, are claiming that they are advanced in scientific knowledge, as described here by the words svādhyāya-śruta-sampannāḥ. They say that according to their scientific way, they have discovered that milk is dangerous and that the beef obtained by killing cows is very nutritious. This difference of opinion will always continue. Indeed, it has existed since days of yore. Millions of years ago, there was the same competition. The demons, as a result of their so-called Vedic study, preferred to hold the side of the snake near the mouth. The Supreme Personality of Godhead thought it wise to catch hold of the dangerous part of the snake and allow the demons to hold the tail, which was not dangerous, but because of a competitive desire, the demons thought it wise to hold the snake near the mouth. If the demigods were going to drink poison, the demons would resolve, "Why should we not share the poison and die gloriously by drinking it?"
SB Cantos 10.14 to 12 (Translations Only)
By interaction of My energies different opinions arise. But for those who have fixed their intelligence on Me and controlled their senses, differences of perception disappear, and consequently the very cause for argument is removed.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Adi-lila
At first all the followers of Advaita Ācārya shared a single opinion. But later they followed two different opinions, as ordained by providence.
Some of the disciples strictly accepted the orders of the ācārya, and others deviated, independently concocting their own opinions under the spell of daivī-māyā.
This verse describes the beginning of a schism. When disciples do not stick to the principle of accepting the order of their spiritual master, immediately there are two opinions. Any opinion different from the opinion of the spiritual master is useless. One cannot infiltrate materially concocted ideas into spiritual advancement. That is deviation. There is no scope for adjusting spiritual advancement to material ideas.
CC Madhya-lila
Advaita Ācārya said, "You are a reject paramahaṁsa, and You have accepted the renounced order of life just to fill up Your belly. I can understand that Your business is to give trouble to brāhmaṇas."
There is always a difference of opinion between a smārta-brāhmaṇa and a Vaiṣṇava gosvāmī. There are even smārta opinions and Vaiṣṇava gosvāmī opinions available in astrological and astronomical calculations. By calling Nityānanda Prabhu a bhraṣṭa avadhūta (a rejected paramahaṁsa), Advaita Ācārya Prabhu in a sense accepted Nityānanda Prabhu as a paramahaṁsa. In other words, Nityānanda Prabhu had nothing to do with the rules governing smārta-brāhmaṇas. Thus under pretense of condemning Him, Advaita Ācārya was actually praising Him. In the avadhūta stage, the paramahaṁsa stage, which is the supermost stage, one may appear to be viṣayī, on the platform of sense gratification, but in actuality he has nothing to do with sense gratification.
According to some, the old name of the Tuṅgabhadrā River was Pambā. According to others, Vijaya-nagara, the capital of the state, was known as Pampātīrtha. According to still others, the lake near Anāguṇḍi, in the direction of Hyderabad, is Pampā-sarovara. The river Tuṅgabhadrā also flows through there. There are many different opinions about the lake called Pampā-sarovara.
When Subuddhi Rāya consulted some other brāhmaṇas, they told him that he had not committed a grievous fault and that consequently he should not drink hot ghee and give up his life. As a result, Subuddhi Rāya was doubtful about what to do.
This is another instance of Hindu custom. One brāhmaṇa would give advice condoning a particular fault, and another would give advice to the contrary. Typically, lawyers and physicians differ, giving one kind of instruction and then another. Due to the brāhmaṇas' different opinions, Subuddhi Rāya became further perplexed. He did not know what to do or what not to do.
Other Books by Srila Prabhupada
Renunciation Through Wisdom
But now, in modern times, Rāvaṇa's dynasty has multiplied into millions. This has given rise to many different opinions, which have made the demons inimical toward one another. Thus they are all competing tooth and nail, trying to kidnap the goddess of fortune, Sītā-devī. Each one is thinking, "I am the most cunning, and so I will enjoy Sītā-devī all by myself." But like Rāvaṇa, all these demons, along with their entire families, are being destroyed. So many powerful leaders like Hitler have come, but enamoured by the illusion of enjoying and exploiting the Supreme Lord's energy and consort—Sītā-devī, the goddess of fortune—all of them have been thwarted and crushed in the past, are being thwarted and crushed in the present, and will be thwarted and crushed in the future. The root cause of the aforementioned lament—"In the dispensation of providence, mankind cannot have any rest"—is this demoniac mentality of exploiting and enjoying the Lord's divine energy.
Light of the Bhagavata
In this age of Kali, when a slight difference of opinion leads to quarrel, even to the extent of riots, it is the duty of the intelligent men, the brāhmaṇas, to selflessly inspire the richer people to sacrifice for this purpose. It is suggested herewith that the men of the intelligent class should not themselves try to become kṣatriyas or vaiśyas, nor should they engage themselves in the occupations of the various other classes; rather, the brāhmaṇas should simply guide them in spiritual cultivation, just as the wind carries the clouds to other places to pour water. The wind itself does not take up the responsibility for pouring water.
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
First of all we must know what we are. The mistake is that we are accepting this body as ourself. I am thinking Indian, you are thinking Australian, he is thinking American, he is thinking Mohammedan, he is thinking Hindu. In this way, because we are thinking different way, we have got difference of opinion. But as soon as we come to the spiritual platform. There will be no more different opinion. That we are trying, that come to the spiritual platform. Then everything will go on. The first lesson of coming to the spiritual platform is to understand that "I am not this body." This the first lesson of spiritual understanding.
Kṛṣṇa is trying to convince Arjuna that death does not take place. He says clearly that "Myself—I am the Supreme God, Kṛṣṇa—yourself, you, and all the other kings and the soldiers, those who have assembled in this great battlefield, it is not that in the past, we were not existing. And in the present, we are now face to face. We are seeing that we are existing. And in the future, we shall also exist in the same way." "In the same way" means individually. Just like I am an individual person. You are an individual person. He is an individual person. So I, you, he, or they—first person, second person and the third person—so that individuality continues. Individuality of every living being is a fact. Therefore in the actual field also, we see that we have got difference of opinion. What I think, you may not agree with me because you have got your individuality. Similarly, your thinking may not be agreed by another gentleman. So everyone has got his individuality. That is a fact. Not that the... Just like there is a class of philosophers who says that the soul is a homogeneous, one entity, and after the destruction, after the annihilation of this body, the soul, as a substance, will mix up. Just like water. You keep in different pots. In different pots you keep water. So the water takes the shape of the pot, the bowl, round bowl. You keep water. The water takes the shape of round. So similarly, there are thousands of, or millions of, waterpots, and suppose all the waters are mixed up. Then there is no distinction. Just like they were in the pots. So their theory is that when a soul is liberated then the, that it mixes up with the Supersoul. Just like a drop water taken from the sea water and again put it into the sea, it mixes up. It loses its identity.
Puruṣa. Puruṣa means the enjoyer. Everyone of us sitting in this hall, we have got different mentality to enjoy differently, different dress, different mentality, different opinion, because everyone of us we are individual. So this individuality is both in spiritual world and the material world. But in the material world our individuality is different on account of associating or infecting different qualities of the material nature. Just like there are different types of patients in the hospital. Why? Because each and every one of them is infected by different types of germs of disease.
Even Śaṅkarācārya, who is, who has got a different opinion from the Personality of Godhead. Because we, we, the Vaiṣṇavas, we are, we accept the personal Godhead, but there are other philosophers who do not accept the personal feature of the Supreme Absolute Truth. Śaṅkarācārya was the head of this impersonal school. Still, he has admitted in his commentation of Bhagavad-gītā that sa kṛṣṇaḥ svayaṁ bhagavān: "Oh, Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord. He's the Supreme Lord." So Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord, and He's accepted.
If you have to believe Bhagavad-gītā, then the distinction you have to believe, you have to take. You cannot say that "There is no difference between me and Kṛṣṇa." No, there is difference. Here the difference is clearly explained that "That is the difference between you and Me, that you forget. You cannot remember all the incidences of your life, past, present and future, but I can remember." That is the difference.
Now, the next question is that if He does not change His body, why He takes, comes as incarnation? These are very difficult questions. There are some, many difference of opinions amongst the philosophers. Somebody says that Kṛṣṇa assumes the material body when He comes. No. He doesn't assume the material body like us. Then He could not remember. Just, here is a critical point. If He would have accepted material body like us, then He could not remember because we have got this material body, and due to this material body and change, we cannot remember anything. Therefore the natural conclusion is that He does not change His body.
Now, the whole process of spiritual realization is to come to this stage, transcendental stage. This relationship with the Supreme Lord is pervertedly reflected in this material world. And therefore we have got this relationship here, master and servant. But because it is perverted, therefore that relationship is not master and servant. That relationship is with the money and the benefit. There is no love. There is no love. Here in this material world, the master and the servant, that relationship continues so long the master is able to pay the servant. As soon as the payment is stopped, the relationship of master and servant also stops. Therefore that is not eternal. (to someone:) Come on. Sit down here. That is not eternal. Similarly, here also, there is relationship between friend and friend. But in slight difference of opinion the friendship breaks. The friend becomes enemy. Therefore it is perverted reflection. Similarly, the relationship between... (aside:) Come on here. Relationship between mother and son. A slight difference of opinion breaks the relationship, and the son becomes out of the relationship of mother, mother becomes out of... Every way. Husband and wife, a slight difference of opinion, there is divorce, separation.
If you are inquisitive, if you are actually philosopher, then you will find Kṛṣṇa: Kṛṣṇa is Bhagavān. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). That is the verdict of the Vedic śāstra. Kṛṣṇas tu... We are searching after Bhagavān, or God. We simply try to understand that God is very great. That's fact. But how great He is, that has to be known. That is called knowledge of God. Now we cannot think of that one person can become the proprietor of all the riches and wealth of the world. But unless we accept it, he is not God.
So this understanding of God requires a process, how to understand. The main process is that we cannot speculate about God. That is not possible. If we want to know God by speculation, there may be difference of opinion. I may say, "God is like this." You may say, "God is like this." Then difference of opinion. Therefore best thing is to know God from God. That is required. Let God speak Himself about Himself. That is perfect. If you simply conjecture, guess, that "Swamiji may be like this," another may say "Like this, like that." But if I say unto you, "I am like this," that is perfect. So here in the Bhagavad-gītā we have got this advantage, followers of Vedic literature, that the Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, is speaking Himself about Himself. That is perfect knowledge. Therefore it is said, bhagavān uvāca. The Supreme Personality of Godhead is speaking Himself.
There are different kinds of ṛṣis—Gautama Ṛṣi, Kaṇada Ṛṣi... They have spoken different... In India there are six kinds of philosophies, but they are not recognized. Ṛṣibhiḥ, just like Devala Ṛṣi, Nārada Ṛṣi, Vyāsadeva, Asita Ṛṣi, Valmīki Ṛṣi, they are recognized. Ṛṣibhir bahudhā gītam. So they have got different philosophical ways to understand.
Therefore Bhāgavata summarizes that tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā nāsau ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. He's not a ṛṣi who's opinion is not different. Yes. You are a ṛṣi. You have got some different system of philosophy. And if I want to become a ṛṣi, then I must disagree with you. Just like in the modern days it is going on, scientific research, philosophical research. Therefore it is said, nāsau ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na vibhinnam: "One cannot become a rsi unless he gives his personal different opinion."
There are many scriptures and many philosophers, ṛṣis, as I explained yesterday, nāsau ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnā: "He's not a philosopher who hasn't got a different opinion." Because this material world is practically a challenge to the supreme authority. The supreme authority Kṛṣṇa, He's the bhokta actually, He's the enjoyer.
Vibhūti-bhinnam. Each planet has got different atmosphere. Therefore these people, they cannot understand what is the atmosphere. They understand. Some scientists, they say the atmosphere in the moon planet is two hundred degrees below zero. So there are difference of scientists' opinion, but according to Vedic literature we understand that there are innumerable planets, and one of the planets is the moon planet. Nakṣatrāṇām ahaṁ śaśī. Nakṣatrāṇām: "Among the stars and planets," Kṛṣṇa says, "I am the moon."
Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures
The basic principle is that yenātmā suprasīdati. Social... Yat kṛtaḥ kṛṣṇa-sampraśno yenātmā suprasīdati. Every householder... Everyone is dissatisfied. There is no peaceful atmosphere between the husband and the wife, the son and the father. We remain, of course, together. But everyone is of different opinion. In your country it is very practically experienced. Nobody agrees with nobody. Everyone has got his own opinions. So if Kṛṣṇa's center... Even in Kṛṣṇa's center, we are having different opinions, because we are accustomed to live like that. But actually, if we are serious about serving Kṛṣṇa, then there cannot be two opinions. One opinion, how to serve Kṛṣṇa.
So all these relatives of Kṛṣṇa, the Pāṇḍavas, His sister Subhadrā-Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma, Subhadrā. Subhadrā was sister of Kṛṣṇa. So Baladeva wanted to hand over the sister to Duryodhana, and Kṛṣṇa wanted to hand over the sister to Arjuna. Two brothers, difference of opinion. But elder brother's order cannot be disregarded. Therefore Kṛṣṇa planned that Arjuna may kidnap His sister. So Subhadrā was kidnapped by Arjuna in the dress of a sannyāsī. Don't learn this business, sannyāsīs. (laughing) But Kṛṣṇa planned it, that "You come..." Because he was known, if he comes as ordinary Arjuna, then he will be recognized because he is the cousin-brother. Therefore he covered himself as a sannyāsī just like Rāvaṇa. Rāvaṇa also kidnapped Sītādevī as a sannyāsī.
That is a fact, because we are presenting authorized thing. So my request is that you take advantage. You have got good opportunity. You take this advantage of opening the door of liberation and don't misuse your life simply for sense gratification like cats and dogs. Then the people of your country, of your society or your family, they'll be all benefited, and because other nations, they are also imitating your procedures, they'll be benefited. And at least if one percent of the whole population becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious, the whole world will be a different world. There will be..., uh... The world itself will become kingdom of God. Of course, we cannot expect that everyone will accept this philosophy, but we are trying. If some percentage of the population takes this movement seriously, the face of the world will be changed.
Thank you very much. Any question? No question? Then I understand that you accept my proposition without any difference of opinion. (laughs) That's nice. Unanimously accepted. That's nice. But if you have got any difficulty to understand, you can make questions. I shall try to convince you.
Devotee (7): How long do you say it is before Kṛṣṇa comes to this planet again in His physical, in human form?
Prabhupāda: Now calculate, I have already given the duration of one day, twelve hours, of Brahmā means 4,300,000 years multiplied by one thousand. What it comes? 4,300,000 years multiplied by one thousand.
Devotees: Four thousand, three hundred million.
Prabhupāda: No, no.
Paramahaṁsa: Four billion, three hundred million.
Prabhupāda: Oh, difference of opinion. (laughter)
Madhudviṣa: In Australia they calculate different. (laughter)
Prabhupāda: Anyway, what is your Australian calculation? Let me know.
Madhudvīṣa: It's true. Their billion is something else.
Prabhupāda: Oh. Anyway, I give you the right figure, four million, according to American or English calculation, (laughter) 4,300,000 years and multiply it by one thousand. Then what it comes according to English calculation?
Paramahaṁsa: 4,300,000.
Prabhupāda: That is twelve hours. And add again twelve hours, night. Then eight billion...?
Paramahaṁsa: 600,000,000.
Prabhupāda: So Kṛṣṇa comes after this period. (laughter) In one day, after one day of Brahma, He appears.
Guest: I have noticed when everybody touches their head to the floor. And this I find so disturbing (indistinct) another man and kiss their boots. I found that (indistinct). And to tell you frankly, I find it quite shocking, too, that people place their head on the ground before another man. And you are a man like that. You are a man of knowledge, and you're (indistinct). But yet I can't see of people their heads to the floor...
Prabhupāda: You have been asked to do that?
Guest: Nobody asked me, but I see everybody else does it.
Prabhupāda: Then why you are feeling so disturbed?
Guest: Because to me, people are people, and there's... No man is a God, and it's just appearing as if you were...
Prabhupāda: But as you are thinking that they should not, they are thinking that you should. (laughter) As you are thinking they should not do like that, they are thinking you must do that. Then what is it? Difference of opinion. Your vote is single and they are so many. So you have to follow the greatest majority vote.
Guest: Unless I am given a very good reason to do so...
Prabhupāda: No, I am answering your question. As you are thinking in that way, they are also at liberty to think otherwise. So you cannot encroach upon their thinking.
Guest: I will not do that.
Prabhupāda: So therefore as you are thinking that they should not have done, they are thinking you should have done. The real question is that they are following a system. So in that system the spiritual master is offered respect in that way. There is a system. And they don't feel any uneasiness by doing that.
Nectar of Devotion Lectures
That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is oneness. Oneness does not mean we lose our individuality. Sometimes, individually we fight. Just like in the legislative assembly, our representative, M.P.'s, they go and fight. There is a deliberation. But that purpose is to serve the country. Therefore, instead of the difference of opinions, they agree to work in this way. That is legislative assembly. Similarly, individuality there must be always, but when we find out a one means to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, that is oneness. Ekatvam anupaśyataḥ (ISO 7). Eka. That is ekatvam. Why a... In other words, ekatvam... This is the version of the Īśopaniṣad, ekatvam anupaśyataḥ. Ekatvam anupaśyataḥ. Ekatvam, at the same time, anupaśyataḥ. That means we are all spirit soul. We are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. That is anupaśyataḥ. And on this basis, when we find ekatvam, oneness, that is the platform of peace, that "We are all servants of Kṛṣṇa."
People are not educated that what is the ultimate goal of life. Still, they take to religious life as a compromise between the contending elements, that "We must live peacefully under religious system." The aim is how to live in this material world peacefully. Sometimes religion and God is conceived in that way, that is, "If we have some conception of God, then we shall be moral, we shall be peaceful. Otherwise, there is no need of presenting God in the society." There are so many different opinions, different philosophers, different religious system, according to the modes of nature. But actually every system must be targeted towards realization of Kṛṣṇa, or God. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). That is Bhāgavata-dharma.
So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is directly touching the point. Not step by step. There is no time. In the Kali-yuga there is very little time to go step by step. Otherwise, there are twenty different types of religious scriptures, viṁśati-prakāśa, dharma-śāstra. So who will read, and who will try to understand? There is no time. Prāyeṇa alpāyuṣaḥ kalāu asmin yuge janāḥ. People who are very short-living and they are not very enthusiastic for self-realization. Manda. Even they, somebody becomes interested in self-realization, they accept some wrong path. Mandāḥ sumanda-matayo (SB 1.1.10). They have got different mataḥ, opinion or path. And the so-called swamis, they also support that "Whatever opinion you have got about religious system, that is all right." Yata mata tata patha. But actually, the fact is different. The fact is that one should take simply to the devotional path, bhaktyā mām abhijānāti (BG 18.55). If you are actually serious to know God, or Kṛṣṇa, then you must take to this process of devotional service. Without this you cannot understand. Not through karma, not through mystic yogic exercises, but through devotional service. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti, yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ (BG 18.55). That is clearly stated in the Bhagavad... But people do not know it. Anartha upaśamaṁ sākṣād bhakti-yogam adhokṣaje. Bhakti-yogam, execution of bhakti-yoga, is the means of anartha upaśama, subduing the anarthas.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
As the sunshine is coming out, emanating incessantly from the sun disc, similarly the real sunshine, brahma-jyotir, is coming out of the spiritual planet Goloka Vṛndāvana incessantly. That is called brahma-jyotir. Yasya prabhā prabhavato (Bs. 5.40). And due to that incessant shining, all the shining which you are experiencing, even this lamp, even this electricity, fire, moonshine, sunshine, any shining, that is due to that brahma-jyotir. So yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). In that shining, this material world, the spiritual world, they are resting. So impersonalists, they are concerned with the shining, that's all. The difference between the personalists and impersonalists is that impersonalists, they take that shining as final. But the personalists, they take, "No. Kṛṣṇa is final." That is their difference of opinion. Otherwise, both of them in the spiritual realm. And so far Kṛṣṇa is the cause of brahma-jyotir, there are many evidences from Vedic literature. In Īśopaniṣad and other Upaniṣads, in Bhagavad-gītā also, the Lord says, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ pratiṣṭhā: "I am the source of brahma-jyotir." You'll find in the Fourteenth Chapter, last verse, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ jyoti.
Festival Lectures
Actually, if we want to make progress in spiritual life, we have to follow the mahājanas, the great personalities. They are mentioned in the śāstras. Without father and mother, he became manifest. Therefore his name is Svayambhu. Without father and mother, he became manifest. Therefore his name is Svayambhu. Of course, his father is Nārāyaṇa, but not in the usual way. Therefore his name is Svayambhu. Nārada. Nārada Muni is also one of the mahājanas. And Śambhu, Lord Śiva. Kapila, Kapiladeva, the son of Devahūti. Svayaṁbhur nāradaḥ śaṁbhuḥ kapilo manuḥ (SB 6.3.20). And Prahlāda Mahārāja. Prahlāda Mahārāja is our guru in the disciplic succession. So mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). Dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. We cannot chalk out what is the path of religion. It is very difficult to find out because there are many different scriptures and there are many philosophers. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. Each philosopher has got different opinion. So how to get real path of religious way? That is recommended in the śāstra that mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). You have to follow the footsteps of great personalities. And Prahlāda Mahārāja is one of them.
General Lectures
We cannot realize the Supreme Truth simply by argument or logical presentation or philosophical speculation. No. Tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā (CC Madhya 17.186). Śrutayo means scriptures. Now say, for example, Bhagavad-gītā and your Bible and the Muhammadans, they'll present Koran. So of course, this Bhagavad-gītā is little different from Vedic scripture. That we have already explained. It is an independent something, universal. So Vedic scripture, Koran, Bible, or Zoroastrian... There are so many religions, Buddhist religion, so many. So there may be some difference of opinion. Śrutayor vibhinnā. Vibhinnā means different. Now, you cannot realize the Absolute Truth simply by your mundane arguments and by your logical strength, neither you can catch up the right thing by reading different scriptures.
Then how to catch up the Absolute Truth? What is the way? Now, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām: "Therefore the Absolute Truth is concealed within your heart." Nihitaṁ guhāyām. Now, mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ: (CC Madhya 17.186) "You just try to follow the great personalities, what they are doing, what they are doing." Now, about this mahājana, there is also difference of opinion who is mahājana. But so far our Vedic culture is concerned, there are specific mention, mahājana. And so far Lord Kṛṣṇa is concerned, so there is no two opinions about His authority throughout the whole world. And so far we are concerned, Hindus, or the followers of the Vedic religion, there is no difference of opinion so far Kṛṣṇa's authority is concerned. There are five authorities, recognized authorities, in India so far this is..., spiritual life is concerned. One of them is Śrī Rāmānujācārya and other is Śaṅkarācārya. The other is Madhvācārya, other is Viṣṇu Svāmī, and other Nimbārka, Nimbāditya (?). Principal. The whole, I mean, some of them flourished, say, two thousand years before; some of them 1,500 years before; some of them eleven hundred years before. Just like there are different ages, they have come. But all of them, in spite of their coming in different ages, they all are in one opinion—kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam: (SB 1.3.28) "Kṛṣṇa, Lord Kṛṣṇa, is the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Just like we have cited, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1): "The supreme controller, the Supreme Lord, is Kṛṣṇa." Now, we can see from His presentation of this Bhagavad-gītā how supreme He is.
Cloud cannot cover the sun. There may be a cloud overcast in the sky for hundred miles, but even hundred miles, is it possible to cover the sun, hundred miles cloud? The sun is itself so many hundreds of thousand times more than this earth. So māyā cannot cover the Supreme Brahman. Māyā can cover the small particles Brahman. So we may become covered by māyā or cloud, but the Supreme Brahman is never covered by māyā. That is the difference of opinion between Māyāvāda philosophy and Vaiṣṇava philosophy. The Māyāvāda philosophy says that the Supreme is covered. The Supreme cannot be covered. Then how He becomes supreme? The covering becomes supreme. Oh, there are so many arguments and so many... But we follow that the cloud covers the small particles of sunshine. But sun remains as it is. And we practically see also when we go by jet plane, we are over the cloud. There is no cloud outside. Sun is clear. In the lower status there is some cloud. If you go thousands of miles up, we don't see any cloud. Everything sunshine.
We should be little careful that this knowledge, transcendental knowledge, as distributed by Lord Caitanya, should be seriously taken up by the responsible Indians present here. Unfortunately, I see that Indians are not very much interested, but that is our misfortune. Actually, Caitanya Mahāprabhu entrusted this mission that anyone who has taken birth as human being on the land of Bhārata-varṣa should learn this spiritual science very seriously, make his life successful, and distribute all over the world so that people of the world may become happy. That was His mission. Now, this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is started on this mission, on the mission of Lord Caitanya, that to distribute,
- harer nāma harer nāma harer nāma iva kevalam
- kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva nāsty eva gatir anyathā
- (CC Adi 17.21)
That in this age of Kali there are many differences of opinion for self-realization, or transcendental life, or religious life, but this common formula, chanting of the holy name of God, can be accepted by everyone.
Just like in the modern age, the youngsters, you all boys and girls, they are becoming skeptic. They don't believe in any scripture now because they find some differences. Therefore Bhāgavata said that tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā: "Simply by argument you cannot establish what is Absolute Truth, and if you consult different scriptures, you will find difference of opinion, or difference of procedures, rituals." So śrutayo vibhinnā nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. And if we consult great thinkers or philosophers, they have got their different opinions. Some philosopher says, "I think this is right. I think this is right." So whom you will accept? They are also of different opinion. Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. You won't find a single philosopher whose opinion is not different from the previous philosopher, or muni. Muni means thinker, thoughtful man, muni, from mind. Nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām.
Philosophy Discussions
Hayagrīva: James saw religion as the source of philosophy. He writes, "Since the relation of man to God may be either moral, physical or ritual, it is evident that out of religion in the sense in which we take it, theologies, philosophies, and ecclesiastical organizations may secondarily grow."
Prabhupāda: So philosophy means advancement of knowledge. So we are making progress in knowledge when our knowledge is actually come to the point of perfection of knowledge, that is understanding of God. God is there, but on account of our foolishness, sometimes we deny the existence of God. That is the most foolish platform of living condition. But sometimes we have vague idea, some imagination, and sometimes impersonal, sometimes pantheistic. In this way different philosophies means they are searching after God, but on account of not being perfect, there are differences of opinion or different conception of God. But actually God is person, and when one comes to that platform—to know God, to talk with Him, to see Him, to feel His presence, even to play with Him—that is the highest platform of God realization. And the relationship is God is the great and we are small. So our position is always subordinate.
Hayagrīva: Marx felt that religion is a symptom of a degraded man. He wrote, "Religion is the sigh of a distressed creature, the soul of a heartless world, as it is also the spirit of a spiritless condition. It is the opium of the people. The more a man puts into God, the less he retains in himself."
Prabhupāda: But practically we see that the Communist are also equally failure, even without God. Now these Chinese and Russians, they are not in agreement. So same thing—that those who believed in God and those who did not believe in God the difference existed. And now amongst the Communist there are coming out so many section. So the difference of opinion is still there even denying God, without God. So that is not improvement. The real purpose is to understand what is really God is. That is required both by the Communist or the capitalist. Denying God and acting independently, that has not brought any peaceful condition of the human society.
Hayagrīva: But he felt that if this religion should be allowed, it should be individual and not communal. He says, "Liberty as a right of man is not based on the association of man with man but rather on a separation of man from man. It is the right of separation..."
Prabhupāda: No, there is no question of separation, that if we accept God as the supreme father. Now the Christian religion believes God as the supreme father. So if the supreme father is there, and if we become obedient to the supreme father, then why, where is the difference of opinion? But we do not know the supreme father and we do not obey the supreme father. That is the cause of dissension. The son's duty is to become obedient to the father and enjoy father's property. So if we know the supreme father, and if we live according to the father's order, so there is question of antagonism, dissension. It is all our own, father being the center. That, the difficulty is that we call supreme father but we do not accept the father's order or what is the order of the supreme father. That is the defect.
Hayagrīva: Well he, following Kant, he emphasized inner reality...
Prabhupāda: He may, he may follow Kant and I may follow Kṛṣṇa, but if there is contradiction, then which one is morality? How it will be decided, and who will decide? He may follow somebody. That this question I asked Professor Kotovsky in Moscow, that "You are following Communism, and we are following, say, Kṛṣṇa-ism, but your leader is Lenin and our leader is Kṛṣṇa, that so far the philosophy is concerned we have to accept a leader." So there is no difference in the basic principle of philosophy that we must have a leader. Now who shall be the leader and who will decide it? Regards to both of us, we have got a leader. Now which leader is perfect? If both of them are perfect, then why there is difference of opinion—one leader does not agree with the other leader? So who will answer this question that who is the best leader? Leader you have to follow. That you cannot avoid. Either you follow Kant or you follow Kṛṣṇa. Either you follow Lenin or you follow Kṛṣṇa. What is the answer? Who is the perfect leader? You cannot avoid leader, either you say according to Kant, I say according to Kṛṣṇa.
Conversations and Morning Walks
1969 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). We should follow the footprints of great authorities. That is our business. The Vedic mantra says, tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ. If you simply try to argue and try to approach the Absolute, it is very difficult, simply by argument and reasoning, because our arguments and reason are limited because our senses are imperfect. (break) So tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnāḥ. And scriptures, there are different kinds of scriptures. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. Philosophers, every philosopher has got a different opinion, and unless a philosopher defeats other philosopher, he cannot become a big philosopher. So therefore philosophical speculation also will not make a solution. Dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām. So it is very secret. Then how to get that secret thing? Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). You simply follow great personalities, how they have achieved success. So our, this Vaiṣṇava philosophy is to follow the great personality, just like Kṛṣṇa or Caitanya Mahāprabhu or ācāryas of His succession, to take shelter of authority and follow. That is recommended in Vedas, that you follow great authorities.
1971 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: So far I remember, I was also a student of philosophy, Dr. Urquhart, he said the philosophy is science of sciences. The science, there, I mean theory, begins from philosophy. Philosophy is the science of sciences. But according to Vedic verses, a philosopher is not a philosopher if he has not a different opinion from another philosopher, nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na... Therefore, through the philosopher you cannot come to the right conclusion. Tarkeṇa aprāptaś ca. If you simply go on arguing that will also not help you. If you simply read scriptures that will also not help you. Because there are different scriptures. Bible is different from Vedas and Vedas is different from Koran. So tarka... by argument you cannot come to the conclusion, by simply reading scriptures you cannot come to the conclusion. By following the philosophers you cannot come to the conclusion. Therefore the truth is very confidential. Dharmasyārtha... guhyam. It is kept very confidential. Then how to have it? Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). You have to follow the great personalities who have actually realized God. That is the conclusion.
1972 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: Tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnaḥ. Neither by reading so many books because each book is written in a different way. Tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnaḥ nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam (CC Madhya 17.186). If you consult philosophers, then everyone will give you a different opinion.
Impersonalist: They could be saying the same thing, even though they are saying different things.
Prabhupāda: Maybe same thing, but you will be puzzled by the different opinion. Therefore you have to take the path of great personalities. So we are following Lord Caitanya. Lord Caitanya chanted this Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. So we are following, and we are getting result. That's all. We don't manufacture our own way because we are imperfect. We cannot manufacture. That will not be beneficial.
1975 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: Yes. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam: "If a muni, thoughtful man, hasn't got a different opinion then he is not muni." (laughter) And that is going on. They take it as advancement. There is no standard knowledge. You speak something, and if somebody refutes it with something else, then he is advanced. And then another comes, he becomes more advanced than the second one. And then another comes. So there is no standard knowledge. What is today standard knowledge, tomorrow it is obsolete. Another standard knowledge. So in that way nobody knows what is the standard knowledge. Is it not?
Prabhupāda: Yes, that's a fact. We have little anxieties simply because we have to deal with this rascal world. Otherwise we have no anxiety. But we have taken this mission, to go and approach them, tell them the truth. Therefore we have got little anxiety. Otherwise there is no question of anxiety. Because we are mixing with these rascals—and we have to do that, who have taken this mission-therefore little anxiety there. That is also not very much. But you must know, the whole world is full of rascals and fools. That is not exaggeration. Eh? Or you have got different opinion?
Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: No.
Prabhupāda: Hm? What do you think? Do you agree?
Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: They are mūḍhas.
Prabhupāda: (laughs) Our verdict is final: "All rascals and fools." Therefore, when I ask these rascals, "Any question?" Stopped. (laughter) "Come on, any question?" What they will question? I challenge them, "Any question?" They know that "We have been proved as rascals."
1976 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: So it is the Caitanya Mahāprabhu's message to the whole world that every one of you, you become guru, a spiritual master. So how everyone can become a spiritual master? To become a spiritual master is not easy job. One must be very learned scholar and must have full realization of the self and everything. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu has given us a little formula, that if you strictly follow the teachings of Bhagavad-gītā and if you preach the purpose of Bhagavad-gītā, then you become guru. The exact words used in Bengali, it is said, yāre dekha, tāre kaha 'kṛṣṇa'-upadeśa (CC Madhya 7.128). To become guru is very difficult job, but if you simply carry the message of Bhagavad-gītā and try to convince anyone you meet, then you become a guru. So our, this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is meant for this purpose. We are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is without any malinterpretation. If we interpret Bhagavad-gītā in our own way that is not very good. If you have got a different opinion, you can preach your philosophy. Everyone is free. But one should not take Bhagavad-gītā and through Bhagavad-gītā one will try to preach his own philosophy. That is very bad. You should not do that. Then the authority of Bhagavad-gītā is lost. If everyone can interpret in his own way, then where is the authority of the Bhagavad-gītā?
| Page Title: | Different opinions |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, MadhuGopaldas, Labangalatika |
| Created: | 04 of Dec, 2008 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=2, SB=14, CC=5, OB=2, Lec=30, Con=6, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 59 |