Expressions researched:
"distinguish between"
|"distinguished between"
|"distinguishes between"
|"distinguishing between"
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
How I shall distinguish between the qualified and the nonqualified? The qualification must be seen.
Lecture on BG 4.10 Festival at Maison de Faubourg -- Geneva, May 31, 1974: Devotee: This gentleman says that real wisdom is not manifested by any exterior show, and that it is interior, and the real sage cannot be seen.
Prabhupāda: Cannot be seen? Then why you are taking education, taking degrees? Why you are appearing for examination in the university for degrees? It cannot be seen? If you are actually qualified in something, it must be manifested. Otherwise, everyone will say that "I am quite qualified, but you cannot see." What is this? How I shall distinguish between the qualified and the nonqualified? The qualification must be seen. That is the conclusion.
Paṇḍita, one who knows what is what, he does not distinguish between man and animal or tree. Because he knows that the living force is the same, spiritual quality that is the fragmental portion of the supreme soul, Kṛṣṇa.
Lecture on BG 7.4 -- Bombay, February 19, 1974: So these things are discussed very broadly in our American centers, so we stick to the point that life does not come from chemical, but chemical comes from life. So I gave one crude example. Just like a tree. It is also life, because there are different forms of life, 8,400,000 forms of life. So a tree also, another form of life. One who knows what is the condition of life, paṇḍita, learned, sama-darśinaḥ.
- vidyā-vinaya-sampanne
- brāhmaṇe gavi hastini
- śuni caiva śva-pāke ca
- paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ
- (BG 5.18)
Paṇḍita, who knows what is what, he is sama-darśī, equipoised. He knows that the substance within the tree or substance with the dog or substance with the human being or substance within the brāhmaṇa or a śūdra or a dog or a caṇḍāla—the soul is the same. Therefore, he sees everyone, sama-darśinaḥ. Paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ (BG 5.18). He does not distinguish between man and animal or tree. Because he knows that the living force is the same, spiritual quality that is the fragmental portion of the supreme soul, Kṛṣṇa. So we can understand, if we are little sober, how material things come out.
The impersonalist school, they do not distinguish between these two Brahmans.
Lecture on BG 7.28-8.6 -- New York, October 23, 1966: So as we have several times explained that we are all Brahman, but we are part and parcel of the Brahman. Now here it is said that paramaṁ brahma, the Supreme Brahman. The Supreme Brahman means one who does not come into this material contamination. He is called Supreme Brahman. The impersonalist school, they do not distinguish between these two Brahmans. They say, "Brahman is one. This individual Brahman, this conception of individual Brahman, is māyā, illusion." That is their doctrine. But according to Vaiṣṇava doctrine, they do not accept this. Their question is, "If Brahman is Supreme, then how He comes in contact with the māyā?" A Supreme cannot be under the subordinate, subordination of anything else. If something is under subordination, he cannot be Supreme. He cannot be Supreme. That is their argument.
Jñāna, knowledge, means distinguishing between spirit and matter.
Lecture on BG 10.4 -- New York, January 3, 1967: So jñāna, knowledge, means distinguishing between spirit and matter. And this knowledge should be cultivated and taken full advantage in this life. That is successful life.
The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot distinguish between the jīva soul, jīvātmā, and Paramātmā. They know it, but because they are monists, to establish their theory, they say there is no two, there is one.
Lecture on BG 13.4 -- Paris, August 12, 1973: So both Kṛṣṇa and the living entity are sitting in one tree. That is stated in the Upaniṣad. Two birds are sitting in one tree. One is eating the fruit of the tree and other is simply witnessing. The witnessing bird is Kṛṣṇa. And the bird who is eating the fruits of the tree, he is the living entity. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot distinguish between the jīva soul, jīvātmā, and Paramātmā. They know it, but because they are monists, to establish their theory, they say there is no two, there is one. No. Kṛṣṇa says two. One kṣetrajñaḥ, the jīvātmā, and the other kṣetrajñaḥ He is, Kṛṣṇa. The difference between the two is that the individual living entity knows only about his kṣetra, body, but the other living entity, the supreme living entity, He knows all the bodies, everywhere, anywhere, throughout the whole creation. Sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo (BG 15.15). This is the difference.
Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not distinguish between ātmā and Paramātmā. But here it is distinctly explained by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that one puruṣa is enjoying the fruits of his activities, prakṛti-sthaḥ.
Lecture on BG 13.23 -- Bombay, October 22, 1973: So there are two puruṣas. One puruṣa is already explained. Puruṣaḥ prakṛti-stho hi... (aside:) You can go. Puruṣaḥ prakṛti-stho hi bhuṅkte prakṛti-jān guṇān (BG 13.22). So one puruṣa, the living entity, ātmā, and another puruṣa is Paramātmā. Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not distinguish between ātmā and Paramātmā. But here it is distinctly explained by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that one puruṣa is enjoying the fruits of his activities, prakṛti-sthaḥ. Being influenced by the quality of the prakṛti, material nature, he is sad-asad-janma-yoniṣu, he is taking birth in different types and species of life. And another puruṣa is there who is upadraṣṭā. Upadraṣṭā means he is overseer. He is simply seeing how the other puruṣa is working. And according to his karma, work, he is giving the result. He is the witness.
We are īśvara; He is Parameśvara. We are not Parameśvara. We are Brahman, He is Parabrahman. This "param" word is used. But sometimes men with little intelligence, they cannot distinguish between Paramātmā and ātmā, Parameśvara and īśvara.
Lecture on BG 13.23 -- Bombay, October 22, 1973: So the other body, which is described here, Paramātmā... We are ātmā, and He is Paramātmā. We are īśvara; He is Parameśvara. We are not Parameśvara. We are Brahman, He is Parabrahman. This "param" word is used. But sometimes men with little intelligence, they cannot distinguish between Paramātmā and ātmā, Parameśvara and īśvara. Here another word is used, bhoktā maheśvaraḥ. We are not bhoktā. We are trying to become bhoktā, or enjoyer, but we are becoming baffled. It is not possible. We cannot become bhoktā. We can become being enjoyed, predominated, not the predominator. Just like one thing is enjoyed and the other is enjoyer. The Supreme Lord, He is the enjoyer. Bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sarva-loka-maheśvaram (BG 5.29).
Ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā, Kṛṣṇa says. So why shall I distinguish between this person to that person? Everyone is Vaiṣṇava. That is mahā-bhāgavata.
Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Hyderabad, December 16, 1976: Samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. Paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ (BG 5.18). Then sarveṣu bhūteṣu, every living entity, he can... He knows that every living entity is the son of Kṛṣṇa. Ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā (BG 14.4), Kṛṣṇa says. So why shall I distinguish between this person to that person? Everyone is Vaiṣṇava. That is mahā-bhāgavata. Mahā-bhāgavata does not see any distinction. He sees everyone. Paṇḍitāḥ sama...
Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures
It is for us to distinguish between matter and spirit. But Kṛṣṇa, being the original source of everything, He is absolutely spirit. That's all.
Lecture on SB 1.8.44 -- Los Angeles, May 6, 1973: So Kṛṣṇa's thinking, taxing the brain or walking there is no such difference. In our body also there is no such difference. But because we are in the materialistic world, dual world, we make distinction: this is superior, inferior. But for Kṛṣṇa there is no such thing, "superior," "inferior." Everything is Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosopher says that when Kṛṣṇa comes, He accepts a material body. But these foolish people, they do not know that Kṛṣṇa has no material body. For Kṛṣṇa, everything is spiritual. Kṛṣṇa has no material body. It is for us to distinguish between matter and spirit. But Kṛṣṇa, being the original source of everything, He is absolutely spirit. That's all. The Supreme Spirit. He has no such distinction.
The purport of the poetry was that "Jagannātha is Kṛṣṇa. But He cannot move. He's wooden Kṛṣṇa. And Caitanya Mahāprabhu is also Kṛṣṇa, but He is moving Kṛṣṇa." That means he distinguished between Jagannātha and Caitanya Mahāprabhu. So this is not siddhānta.
Lecture on SB 2.3.23 -- Los Angeles, June 20, 1972: Caitanya Mahāprabhu's secretary, Svarūpa Dāmodara, he advised one brāhmaṇa. One brāhmaṇa wrote something about Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. There were many poets and writers used to come and visit Caitanya Mahāprabhu when He was at Jagannātha Purī, and they would present some writings, but these writings would not be presented before Caitanya Mahāprabhu unless it was sanctioned by His secretary Svarūpa Dāmodara. That was the system. So one brāhmaṇa, he wrote one poetry that... The purport of the poetry was that "Jagannātha is Kṛṣṇa. But He cannot move. He's wooden Kṛṣṇa. And Caitanya Mahāprabhu is also Kṛṣṇa, but He is moving Kṛṣṇa." That means he distinguished between Jagannātha and Caitanya Mahāprabhu. So this is not siddhānta.
The Caitanya-caritāmṛta kaṛacā, the author of Caitanya-caritāmṛta, he has distinguished between kāma and prema.
Lecture on SB 3.26.44 -- Bombay, January 19, 1975: The Caitanya-caritāmṛta kaṛacā, the author of Caitanya-caritāmṛta, he has distinguished between kāma and prema. Kāma means lusty desires or sex desires. Generally, it is meant, sex desires. So he has very simplified the matter very much. Ātmendriya-prīti-vāñchā—dhare... nāma dhare... prema... tāre... bali dhare...nāma kāma (CC Adi 4.165), like that. Kṛṣṇendriya-prīti-vāñchā dhare nāma prema, and ātmendriya-prīti-vāñchā—dhare nāma kāma. They... Actually, senses are there for satisfaction. That's a fact. Otherwise, why the senses are there? Just like the smell is there, and the nose is there. So smell is there for satisfaction of the senses. For the smell, for the nose, nostril, the beautiful flower is there, or beautiful, anything beautiful... To the man, woman is beautiful; to the woman, man is beautiful. So the eyes are there, and the beautiful things are there. That is arrangement. That is development of this nature.
If you have got so broader vision, then why you distinguish between poor and rich?
Lecture on SB 5.5.3 -- Hyderabad, April 15, 1975: Poor is God? Then why rich is not God? If you have so broad vision, that you see God everywhere, so why you make distinction between poor God and rich God? Why you make distinction? If poor is God, the rich is also God. Paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ (BG 5.18). If you have got so broader vision, then why you distinguish between poor and rich. A paṇḍita, a learned scholar,
- vidyā-vinaya sampanne
- brāhmaṇe gavi hastini
- śuni caiva śva-pāke ca
- paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ
- (BG 5.18)
Sama-darśī means he has no distinction. Why you should make distinction between poor and rich? That is sama-darśī. As soon as you make distinction, then your vision is imperfect. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu, samata (BG 18.54). Not that I distinguish between this particular class to another particular. That is not brahma-darśana, neither it is sama-darśana.
These jñānīs, they are thinking that "Now we have become liberated because we have learned to distinguish between the shadow and reality." But they cannot enjoy reality because they are śūnyavādī, nirviśeṣa.
Lecture on SB 6.1.25 -- Chicago, July 9, 1975: It is said in the śāstra, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. These jñānīs, they are thinking that "Now we have become liberated because we have learned to distinguish between the shadow and reality." So... But they cannot enjoy reality because they are śūnyavādī, nirviśeṣa. They cannot believe that here there is ball dance and there is Kṛṣṇa dancing with the gopīs—it is the same thing. So how it is reality? This is their misfortune. They cannot judge that unless in Kṛṣṇa there is ball dance, how this ball dance can be shadow? The variety is there. But unless there is reality, how the shadow... We are after shadow. Shadow is not reality. But there must be reality. And if in the shadow there are so many varieties, so why not reality also full of varieties? The poor fund of knowledge of the Māyāvādī...
We have got very simple test in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement how to distinguish between an intelligent man a rascal. As soon as we understand that he's not Kṛṣṇa conscious, he's a rascal. Bās.
Lecture on SB 6.1.38 -- Los Angeles, June 4, 1976: A child can understand, "Do you know God?" "No." "You are a demon." (laughter) Finished. Where is the difficulty? As soon as you say "I do not know God," you are a demon. Bās. First-class demon. "I am scientist." "You are rascal." "No, I have studied, I have got my degrees." "Māyayāpahṛta-jñāna. (laughter) Rascal, you have studied so long, simply waste of time. Your real knowledge is taken away because you do not know God." That is described. We have got very simple test in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement how to distinguish between an intelligent man a rascal. As soon as we understand that he's not Kṛṣṇa conscious, he's a rascal. Bās. There is no need of testing. Even though he's M.A., Ph.D, D.H.C. and so on, so on, still we shall call him a rascal. This is open challenge; it is not secret.
If I don't take education and enlightenment how to become religious, I do not know how to distinguish between right and wrong, then yathā paśu—then I am as good as animal.
Lecture on SB 6.2.5-6 -- Vrndavana, September 9, 1975: So what is the position of a person or any being who does not know to make distinction what is dharma and adharma? So they have been described. He is described as yathā paśuḥ. Paśuḥ. Paśuḥ means animal. An animal cannot make distinction what is right or what is wrong. That is not possible. Therefore it is said, dharmeṇa hīnā paśubhiḥ samānāḥ: "One who is ignorant of dharma-adharma, he is no better than paśu." Āhāra-nidrā-bhaya-maithunaṁ ca sāmānyam etat paśubhiḥ narāṇām. Āhāra, eating. I eat, the dog eats, the cat eats. I sleep, the dog sleeps, and the cat sleeps. I have sex desire, I satisfy it. The cats and dogs also satisfy it. And I am also afraid of my enemy; the cats and dogs are also afraid of enemy. Then where is the difference between cats and dogs? The difference is that I can be trained up to become religious; the cats and dogs cannot be trained. That is the difference. Dharmeṇa hīnā paśubhiḥ samānāḥ. So if I don't take education and enlightenment how to become religious, I do not know how to distinguish between right and wrong, then yathā paśu—then I am as good as animal.
We must distinguish between different types of devotees. Kaniṣṭha adhikārī, madhyama-adhikārī and mahā-bhāgavata, uttama adhikārī.
Lecture on SB 7.9.4 -- Mayapur, February 18, 1977: So Prahlāda Mahārāja is mahā-bhāgavata, not ordinary devotee. Arbhakaḥ. Arbhakaḥ means innocent child, five-years-old small boy. But mahā-bhāgavata. Not that because he is boy... Ahaituky apratihatā. A small child can become mahā-bhāgavata, and a very learned scholar may become a demon. Bhakti is so exalted that these are contradictory. Arbhakaḥ, arbha means foolish or childish, but at the same time mahā-bhāgavata. It is possible. Mahā-bhāgavata means... We must distinguish between different types of devotees. Kaniṣṭha adhikārī, madhyama-adhikārī and mahā-bhāgavata, uttama adhikārī. Uttama-adhikārī.
Nectar of Devotion Lectures
In the material world there is no love. Therefore Caitanya-caritāmṛta Kaja, the author of Caitanya-caritāmṛta, he has distinguished between love and lust.
The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 28, 1972: What is the difference between kāma and... Kāma means lust; and love. Kāma and prema. Prema is love, and kāma is lust. It appears similar. In the material world, lust is going on in the name of love. A boy loves a girl, a girl loves a boy, but actually the boy also wants sense gratification and the girls also want sense gratification. That is not love. As soon as there is any difficulty in sense gratification, immediately there is divorce. So there is no love. There is only lust. In the material world there is no love. Therefore Caitanya-caritāmṛta Kaja, the author of Caitanya-caritāmṛta, he has distinguished between love and lust. He says, ātmendriya-prīti-vāñchā tāre nāma kāma (CC Adi 4.165). When you want to satisfy your senses, that is called lust. Kṛṣṇendriya-prīti vāñchā dhare prema nāma. When you want to satisfy the senses of Kṛṣṇa, that is love.
Unfortunately, they distinguish between American Vaiṣṇava and Indian Vaiṣṇava: brāhmaṇa Vaiṣṇava, śūdra Vaiṣṇava. No. A Vaiṣṇava is Vaiṣṇava.
The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 1, 1972: One should not be designated "I am this," "I am that," "I am that." No. The world should unite. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is so nice that one should forget that he's Indian or Hindu or Christian or American or Indian. Everything should unite as servant of Kṛṣṇa. That is bhakti-mārga. Unfortunately, they distinguish between American Vaiṣṇava and Indian Vaiṣṇava: brāhmaṇa Vaiṣṇava, śūdra Vaiṣṇava. No. A Vaiṣṇava is Vaiṣṇava. Viṣṇur asya devataḥ iti vaiṣṇava. One who has accepted Viṣṇu as "my Lord," he has no designation. A Vaiṣṇava has no such distinction. Sarvopādhi-vinirmuktam (CC Madhya 19.170).
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
Human life begins when we can distinguish between sat and asat. If we remain in darkness without understanding what is sat and asat, then we are no better than dogs and cats.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.106 -- New York, July 12, 1976: Now I have got this body, Indian body or Christian body or American body. But this, everything, this conception of Christianity or Indian nationality or American nationality—everything will be finished with this body. Everything will be finished. Therefore all our engagements in this connection, they are all asad-dharma. It is very difficult. We are all engaged in occupational duties, all asad-dharma. But the Vedic injunction is asato mā sad gama: "Don't remain in this asat platform. Come to the sat platform." And the same thing is described here, sad-dharmasyāvabodhāya. So the human life begins when we can distinguish between sat and asat. If we remain in darkness without understanding what is sat and asat, then we are no better than dogs and cats.
For the Supreme Lord there is no such discrimination—what is hog, what is dog, what is brāhmaṇa, what is good, what is bad—because He is Absolute. But here we have to distinguish between the hog and the dog, at least so far the material body is concerned.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.152-154 -- New York, December 5, 1966: We have already studied in the Bhagavad-gītā that the Lord has two distinctive features: material and spiritual, superior and inferior. Of course, for Him there is no superior or inferior. But for us, it is superior, inferior. We cannot say that because everything is emanation from the Supreme, therefore there is no superior or inferior. No. Superior, inferior, in relationship with the energy. Just like īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati: (BG 18.61) "Īśvara, the Supreme Lord, is situated in everyone's heart." So He is in the heart of a hog, of a dog, and the learned brāhmaṇa as well. For Him there is no such discrimination—what is hog, what is dog, what is brāhmaṇa, what is good, what is bad—because He is Absolute. But here we have to distinguish between the hog and the dog, at least so far the material body is concerned.
Just to distinguish between the body of the Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, and our body, here the body of Kṛṣṇa is said, ānanda-mātram.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.36-40 -- San Francisco, January 23, 1967: We are thinking that "I am this body," and therefore a little sense gratification... Because the body means there are different senses, and if we can gratify the senses we think that we are happy. This is madness. Ṛṣabhādeva says, nūnaṁ pramattaḥ kurute vikarma yad indriya-prītaya āpṛṇoti (SB 5.5.4). The only business is sense gratification. He says, na sādhu manye: "This is not very good." Sādhu means good. Just to distinguish between the body of the Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, and our body, here the body of Kṛṣṇa is said, ānanda-mātram. Ānanda-mātram, simply full of..., reservoir of all pleasures. So because we are part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, we have also ānanda-mātram, simply blissful body we have got. That is called spiritual body. But because we have become mad, we have identified that this material body as "I am." Therefore And material body means sense gratification. There is no other alternative. To enjoy this material body means to gratify the senses.
Sri Brahma-samhita Lectures
Sama-darśinaḥ means he does not distinguish between a man, learned man... A paṇḍita is sama-darśī. He sees equally, who? A very learned scholar, brāhmaṇa; and a elephant; and a dog; and a cow.
Lecture on Brahma-samhita, Verse 32 -- New York, July 26, 1971: When one comes to the standard of high elevated knowledge, naturally he becomes vegetarian. Because paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ (BG 5.18). Paṇḍita means one who is very highly learned, paṇḍita. Sama-darśinaḥ. Sama-darśinaḥ means he does not distinguish between a man, learned man...
- vidyā-vinaya-sampanne
- brāhmaṇe gavi hastini
- śuni caiva śva-pāke ca
- paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ
- (BG 5.18)
A paṇḍita is sama-darśī. He sees equally, who? A very learned scholar, brāhmaṇa; and a elephant; and a dog; and a cow. How he's sama-darśī? How his vision is equal to all of them? Because he does not see the body; he sees the soul. Brahma-bhūtaḥ. He sees the Brahman, spark, that "Here is a dog, but it is also a living entity. By his past karma, he has become a dog. And here is a learned scholar. He's also living spark. But he has got this nice opportunity for his past karma." So he does not see the body. He sees the spirit soul, spark. So when one comes to that position, he does not make any distinction between this living entity to that living entity.
General Lectures
Do you distinguish between sunshine and the sun planet? Or you say because the sunshine has come within your room, therefore sun planet has come within your room? Do you think like that?
Conway Hall Lecture -- London, September 15, 1969: Guest (3) (Indian man): ...consciousness, then what is that other Kṛṣṇa? Or, other than Kṛṣṇa, what ... And wherefrom...?
Prabhupāda: Yes. I quite follow you. Everywhere is sunshine, but still, the sun's situation is a particular place. The sunshine is everywhere, but still, the sun planet is situated at a particular localized place.
Guest (3): It is manifested locally. It is not localized. It is manifested locally.
Prabhupāda: But do you distinguish between sunshine and the sun planet? Or you say because the sunshine has come within your room, therefore sun planet has come within your room? Do you think like that?
Guest (3): It is a conception of the mind.
Prabhupāda: Why mind? It is a fact. Why do you say "mind"? Can you say that "Oh, because the sunshine has come within my room, the sun planet has come"? Everyone will say you are a fool. It is not mind. It is a fact. The sunshine is light, and the sun globe is light. So light is there, both, but still, there is difference between sunshine and the sun globe. That difference. Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's energy everywhere. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā.
