Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Equate

Bhagavad-gita As It Is

BG Chapters 13 - 18

BG 13.4, Translation and Purport:

Now please hear My brief description of this field of activity and how it is constituted, what its changes are, whence it is produced, who that knower of the field of activities is, and what his influences are.

The Lord is describing the field of activities and the knower of the field of activities in their constitutional positions. One has to know how this body is constituted, the materials of which this body is made, under whose control this body is working, how the changes are taking place, wherefrom the changes are coming, what the causes are, what the reasons are, what the ultimate goal of the individual soul is, and what the actual form of the individual soul is. One should also know the distinction between the individual living soul and the Supersoul, their different influences, their potentials, etc. One just has to understand this Bhagavad-gītā directly from the description given by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and all this will be clarified. But one should be careful not to consider the Supreme Personality of Godhead in every body to be one with the individual soul, the jīva. This is something like equating the potent and the impotent.

Srimad-Bhagavatam

SB Canto 1

SB 1.12.20, Translation and Purport:

This child will be a munificent donor of charity and protector of the surrendered, like the famous King Sibi of the Usinara country. And he will expand the name and fame of his family like Bharata, the son of Maharaja Dusyanta.

A king becomes famous by his acts of charity, performances of yajnas, protection of the surrendered, etc. A ksatriya king is proud to give protection to the surrendered souls. This attitude of a king is called isvara-bhava, or factual power to give protection in a righteous cause. In the Bhagavad-gita the Lord instructs living beings to surrender unto Him, and He promises all protection. The Lord is all-powerful and true to His word, and therefore He never fails to give protection to His different devotees. The king, being the representative of the Lord, must possess this attitude of giving protection to the surrendered souls at all risk. Maharaja Sibi, the King of Usinara, was an intimate friend of Maharaja Yayati, who was able to reach the heavenly planets along with Maharaja Sibi. Maharaja Sibi was aware of the heavenly planet where he was to be transferred after his death, and the description of this heavenly planet is given in the Mahabharata (Adi-parva 96.6-9). Maharaja Sibi was so charitably disposed that he wanted to give over his acquired position in the heavenly kingdom to Yayati, but he did not accept it. Yayati went to the heavenly planet along with great rsis like Astaka and others. On inquiry from the rsis, Yayati gave an account of Sibi's pious acts when all of them were on the path to heaven. He has become a member of the assembly of Yamaraja, who has become his worshipful deity. As confirmed in the Bhagavad-gita, the worshiper of the demigods goes to the planets of the demigods (yanti deva-vrata devan (BG 9.25)); so Maharaja Sibi has become an associate of the great Vaisnava authority Yamaraja on that particular planet. While he was on the earth he became very famous as a protector of surrendered souls and a donor of charities. The King of heaven once took the shape of a pigeon-hunter bird (eagle), and Agni, the fire-god, took the shape of a pigeon. The pigeon, while being chased by the eagle, took shelter on the lap of Maharaja Sibi, and the hunter eagle wanted the pigeon back from the King. The King wanted to give it some other meat to eat and requested the bird not to kill the pigeon. The hunter bird refused to accept the King's offer, but it was settled later on that the eagle would accept flesh from the body of the King of the pigeon's equivalent weight. The King began to cut flesh from his body to weigh in the balance equivalent to the weight of the pigeon, but the mystic pigeon always remained heavier. The King then put himself on the balance to equate with the pigeon, and the demigods were pleased with him. The King of heaven and the fire-god disclosed their identity, and the King was blessed by them. Devarsi Narada also glorified Maharaja Sibi for his great achievements, specifically in charity and protection. Maharaja Sibi sacrificed his own son for the satisfaction of human beings in his kingdom. And thus child Pariksit was to become a second Sibi in charity and protection.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.15.25, Purport:

It may be noted that there are ten offenses we should avoid. The first offense is to decry persons who try in their lives to broadcast the glories of the Lord. People must be educated in understanding the glories of the Supreme; therefore the devotees who engage in preaching the glories of the Lord are never to be decried. It is the greatest offense. Furthermore, the holy name of Viṣṇu is the most auspicious name, and His pastimes are also nondifferent from the holy name of the Lord. There are many foolish persons who say that one can chant Hare Kṛṣṇa or chant the name of Kālī or Durgā or Śiva because they are all the same. If one thinks that the holy name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the names and activities of the demigods are on the same level, or if one accepts the holy name of Viṣṇu to be a material sound vibration, that is also an offense. The third offense is to think of the spiritual master who spreads the glories of the Lord as an ordinary human being. The fourth offense is to consider the Vedic literatures, such as the Purāṇas or other transcendentally revealed scriptures, to be ordinary books of knowledge. The fifth offense is to think that devotees have given artificial importance to the holy name of God. The actual fact is that the Lord is nondifferent from His name. The highest realization of spiritual value is to chant the holy name of God, as prescribed for the age—Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. The sixth offense is to give some interpretation on the holy name of God. The seventh offense is to act sinfully on the strength of chanting the holy name of God. It is understood that one can be freed from all sinful reaction simply by chanting the holy name of God, but if one thinks that he is therefore at liberty to commit all kinds of sinful acts, that is a symptom of offense. The eighth offense is to equate the chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa with other spiritual activities, such as meditation, austerity, penance or sacrifice. They cannot be equated at any level. The ninth offense is to specifically glorify the importance of the holy name before persons who have no interest. The tenth offense is to be attached to the misconception of possessing something, or to accept the body as one's self, while executing the process of spiritual cultivation.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.5.26, Purport:

"The humble sage, by virtue of true knowledge, sees with equal vision a learned and gentle brāhmaṇa, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater (outcaste)." (BG 5.18) This sama-darśinaḥ, equal vision, should not be mistaken to mean that the individual is the same as the Supreme Lord. They are always distinct. Every individual person is different from the Supreme Lord. It is a mistake to equate the individual living entity with the Supreme Lord on the plea of vivikta-dṛk, sama-dṛk. The Lord is always in an exalted position, even though He agrees to live everywhere. Śrīla Madhvācārya, quoting Padma Purāṇa, states: vivikta-dṛṣṭi jīvānāṁ dhiṣṇyatayā parameśvarasya bheda-dṛṣṭiḥ. "One who has clear vision and who is devoid of envy can see that the Supreme Lord is separate from all living entities, although He is situated in every living entity."

SB Canto 7

SB 7.13 Summary:

A person who has attained the paramahaṁsa stage knows very well the distinction between matter and spirit. He is not at all interested in gratifying the material senses, for he is always deriving pleasure from devotional service to the Lord. He is not very anxious to protect his material body. Being satisfied with whatever he attains by the grace of the Lord, he is completely independent of material happiness and distress, and thus he is transcendental to all regulative principles. Sometimes he accepts severe austerities, and sometimes he accepts material opulence. His only concern is to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, and for that purpose he can do anything and everything, without reference to the regulative principles. He is never to be equated with materialistic men, nor is he subject to the judgments of such men.

SB Canto 8

SB 8.5.26, Purport:

Because the Lord is situated in everyone's heart and the individual living entity is not, never should the individual living entity be equated with the Supreme Lord. In Bhagavad-gītā (15.15) the Lord says, sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭaḥ: "I am situated in everyone's heart." This does not mean, however, that everyone is equal to the Lord. In the śruti-mantras it is also said, hṛdi hy ayam ātmā pratiṣṭhitaḥ. In the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said, satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi (SB 1.1.1). The Vedic mantras say, satyaṁ jñānam anantam and niṣkalaṁ niṣkriyaṁ śāntaṁ niravadyam. God is supreme. Although naturally He does not do anything, He is doing everything.

SB 8.16.61, Purport:

If one is not interested in satisfying Lord Viṣṇu, Vāsudeva, all his so-called auspicious activities are fruitless. Moghāśā mogha-karmāṇo mogha-jñānā vicetasaḥ: (BG 9.12) because he is bewildered, he is baffled in his hopes, baffled in his activities, and baffled in his knowledge. In this regard, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī remarks, napuṁsakam anapuṁsakenety-ādinaikatvam. One cannot equate the potent and the impotent. Among modern Māyāvādīs it has become fashionable to say that whatever one does or whatever path one follows is all right. But these are all foolish statements. Here it is forcefully affirmed that this is the only method for success in life. Īśvara-tarpaṇaṁ vinā sarvam eva viphalam. Unless Lord Viṣṇu is satisfied, all of one's pious activities, ritualistic ceremonies and yajñas are simply for show and have no value.

SB Canto 10.1 to 10.13

SB 10.8.19, Purport:

One who equates Nārāyaṇa even with great exalted demigods like Lord Śiva or Lord Brahmā is a pāṣaṇḍī, an agnostic. No one can equal Nārāyaṇa. Nonetheless, Gargamuni used the word sama, meaning "equal," because he wanted to treat Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead who had become Nanda Mahārāja's son. Gargamuni wanted to impress upon the mind of Nanda Mahārāja, "Your worshipable Deity, Nārāyaṇa, is so pleased with you that He has sent you a son almost equal to Him in qualifications. Therefore you may designate your son with a similar name, such as Mukunda or Madhusūdana.

SB 10.13.56, Purport:

"One who considers demigods like Brahmā and Śiva to be on an equal level with Nārāyaṇa must certainly be considered an offender." We should not equate the demigods with Nārāyaṇa, for even Śaṅkarācārya has forbidden this (nārāyaṇaḥ paro'vyaktāt). Also, as mentioned in the Vedas, eko nārāyaṇa āsīn na brahmā neśānaḥ: "In the beginning of creation there was only the Supreme Personality, Nārāyaṇa, and there was no existence of Brahmā or Śiva." Therefore, one who at the end of his life remembers Nārāyaṇa attains the perfection of life (ante nārāyaṇa-smṛtiḥ (SB 2.1.6)).

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 4.34, Purport:

A class of so-called devotees known as sahajiyās try to imitate the Lord's pastimes, although they have no understanding of the amorous love in His expansions of pleasure potency. Their superficial imitation can create havoc on the path for the advancement of one's spiritual relationship with the Lord. Material sexual indulgence can never be equated with spiritual love, which is in unadulterated goodness. The activities of the sahajiyās simply lower one deeper into the material contamination of the senses and mind. Kṛṣṇa's transcendental pastimes display eternal servitorship to Adhokṣaja, the Supreme Lord, who is beyond all conception through material senses. Materialistic conditioned souls do not understand the transcendental exchanges of love, but they like to indulge in sense gratification in the name of devotional service. The activities of the Supreme Lord can never be understood by irresponsible persons who think the pastimes of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa to be ordinary affairs.

CC Adi 4.60, Purport:

The Vedic scriptures inform us that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Absolute Truth, is self-sufficient, and that māyā, nescience, can never influence Him at all. Therefore the potency that overcomes the Supreme must be purely spiritual. Such a potency cannot be anything of the material manifestation. The bliss enjoyed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead cannot be of material composition, like the impersonalist conception of the bliss of Brahman. Devotional service is reciprocation between two, and therefore it cannot be located simply within one's self. Therefore the bliss of self-realization, brahmānanda, cannot be equated with devotional service.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

It is most apparent that nondevotees violate the rules and regulations of devotional service to equate the whole cosmic manifestation, which is the external feature of Viṣṇu, with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the controller of māyā, or with His quadruple expansions. Equating māyā with spirit, or māyā with the Lord, is a sign of atheism. The cosmic creation, which manifests life in forms from Brahmā to the ant, is the external feature of the Supreme Lord. It comprises one fourth of the Lord's energy, as confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (ekāṁśena sthito jagat (BG 10.42)). The cosmic manifestation of the illusory energy is material nature, and everything within material nature is made of matter. Therefore, one should not try to compare the expansions of material nature to the catur-vyūha, the quadruple expansions of the Personality of Godhead, but unfortunately the Māyāvādī school unreasonably attempts to do this.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

In the First Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.16.29) it is said, "O Dharma, protector of religious principles, all noble and sublime qualities are eternally manifested in the person of Kṛṣṇa, and devotees and transcendentalists who aspire to become faithful also desire to possess such transcendental qualities."” It is therefore to be understood that Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the transcendental form of absolute bliss, is the fountainhead of all pleasurable transcendental qualities and inconceivable potencies. In this connection we may recommend references to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Third Canto, Chapter Twenty-six, verses 21, 25, 27 and 28.

Śrīpāda Rāmānujācārya has also refuted the arguments of Śaṅkara in his own commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, which is known as the Śrī-bhāṣya: “Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has tried to equate the Pañcarātras with the philosophy of the atheist Kapila, and thus he has tried to prove that the Pañcarātras contradict the Vedic injunctions. The Pañcarātras state that the personality of jīva called Saṅkarṣaṇa has emerged from Vāsudeva, the supreme cause of all causes, that Pradyumna, the mind, has come from Saṅkarṣaṇa, and that Aniruddha, the ego, has come from Pradyumna. But one cannot say that the living entity (jīva) takes birth or is created, for such a statement is against the injunction of the Vedas.

CC Adi 7.115, Purport:

Māyā’s influence is so strong that even learned scholars and spiritualists are also covered by māyā and think themselves to be as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Actually, however, to free oneself from the influence of māyā one must surrender to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as Kṛṣṇa also states in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.14): mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te. It is to be concluded, therefore, that Lord Viṣṇu does not belong to this material creation but to the spiritual world. To misconceive Lord Viṣṇu to have a material body or to equate Him with the demigods is the most offensive blasphemy against Lord Viṣṇu, and offenders against the lotus feet of Lord Viṣṇu cannot advance in spiritual knowledge. They are called māyayāpahṛta-jñāna, or those whose knowledge has been stolen by the influence of illusion.

CC Adi 7.120, Translation and Purport:

“The Māyāvāda philosophy is so degraded that it has taken the insignificant living entities to be the Lord, the Supreme Truth, thus covering the glory and supremacy of the Absolute Truth with monism.

Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura comments in this connection that in all Vedic scriptures the jīva-tattva, the truth of the living entities, is mentioned to be one of the energies of the Lord. If one does not accept the living entity to be a minute, infinitesimal spark of the Supreme but equates the jīva-tattva with the Supreme Brahman or Supreme Personality of Godhead, it must be understood that his entire philosophy is based on a misunderstanding.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 6.167, Purport:

The first-class materialists (the Māyāvādīs) imagine five specific forms of the Lord, but when they try to equate the worship of such imaginary forms with bhakti, they are immediately condemned. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.15), where He says, na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ. Bereft of real knowledge due to agnosticism, the Māyāvādī philosophers should not even be seen by the devotees of the Lord, nor touched, because those philosophers are liable to be punished by Yamarāja, the superintendent demigod who judges the activities of sinful men. The Māyāvādī agnostics wander within this universe in different species of life due to their nondevotional activities. Such living entities are subjected to the punishments of Yamarāja. Only the devotees, who are always engaged in the service of the Lord, are exempt from the jurisdiction of Yamarāja.

CC Madhya 6.168, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers offer lip service to Vedic authority but try to escape the Vedic ritualistic ceremonies. They concoct some idea of a transcendental position and call themselves Nārāyaṇa, or God. However, God's position is completely different from their concoction. Such Māyāvādī philosophers consider themselves above the influence of karma-kāṇḍa (fruitive activities and their reactions). For them, the spiritual world is equated with the Buddhist voidism. There is very little difference between impersonalism and voidism. Voidism can be directly understood, but the impersonalism enunciated by Māyāvādī philosophers is not very easily understandable. Of course, Māyāvādī philosophers accept a spiritual existence, but they do not know about the spiritual world and spiritual beings.

CC Madhya 8.139, Purport:

One cannot compare the lusty desires of a materialistic man to the transcendental lusty desires of Kṛṣṇa. Unless one is advanced in spiritual science, he cannot understand the lusty desires between Kṛṣṇa and the gopīs. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta the lusty desire of the gopīs is compared to gold. The lusty desires of a materialistic man, on the other hand, are compared to iron. At no stage can iron and gold be equated. The living entities—moving and nonmoving—are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa; therefore they originally have the same kind of lusty desire as His. But when this lusty desire is expressed through matter, it is abominable.

CC Madhya 9.155, Purport:

"A pāṣaṇḍī is one who considers the great demigods such as Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva equal to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyaṇa." (Hari-bhakti-vilāsa 7.117)

The conclusion is that we should neither differentiate between the forms of the Lord nor equate the forms of the Lord with the forms of demigods or human beings. For instance, sometimes foolish sannyāsīs, thinking the body of the Lord to be material, equate daridra-nārāyaṇa with Nārāyaṇa, and this is certainly offensive. Unless one is instructed by a bona fide spiritual master, he cannot perfectly understand these different forms.

CC Madhya 11.187, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers say that the living entity and the Supreme Lord are nondifferent, and therefore they equate the transformation of the living entity with the transformation of the Lord. In other words, Māyāvādīs say that if the living entity is pleased, the Lord is also pleased, and if the living entity is displeased, the Lord is also displeased. By juggling words in this way, Māyāvādīs try to prove that there is no difference between the living entity and the Lord. This, however, is not a fact. In this verse Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī explains: prabhu-guṇe bhṛtya vikala, prabhu bhṛtya-guṇe. The Lord and the living entity are not equal, for the Lord is always the master, and the living entity is always the servant.

CC Madhya 17.116, Purport:

In the beginning, when Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī heard of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's activities, he considered them to be those of a pretender. Consequently he called Him a loka-pratāraka, a pretender. Māyāvādīs cannot understand the transcendental symptoms exhibited by a devotee; therefore when such symptoms are manifest, the Māyāvādīs equate them with temporary emotional feelings. However, Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī’s statement is offensive, and consequently he should be considered an atheist (pāṣaṇḍī).

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 20.28, Purport:

A class of so-called devotees known as prākṛta-sahajiyās sometimes display devotional symptoms to exhibit their good fortune. They are pretending, however, because these devotional features are only external. The prākṛta-sahajiyās exhibit these symptoms to advertise their so-called advancement in love of Kṛṣṇa, but instead of praising the prākṛta-sahajiyās for their symptoms of transcendental ecstasy, pure devotees do not like to associate with them. It is not advisable to equate the prākṛta-sahajiyās with pure devotees. When one is actually advanced in ecstatic love of Kṛṣṇa, he does not try to advertise himself. Instead, he endeavors more and more to render service to the Lord.

Other Books by Srila Prabhupada

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 22:

As soon as the Lord stopped chanting and dancing, Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī fell at His feet. Trying to stop him, Lord Caitanya said, "Oh, you are the spiritual master of the whole world, jagad-guru, and I am not even equal to your disciples. You should therefore not worship an inferior like Me. You are exactly like the Supreme Brahman, and if I allow you to fall down at My feet, I will commit a very great offense. Although you have no vision of duality, for the sake of teaching the people in general you should not do this."

"Previously I spoke ill of You many times," Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī replied. "Now in order to free myself from the results of my offense, I fall down at Your feet." He then quoted a verse from Vedic literatures which states that when even a liberated soul commits an offense against the Supreme Lord, he again becomes a victim of material contamination. Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī then quoted another verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.34.9) regarding Nanda Mahārāja's being attacked by a serpent who was previously Vidyādharārcita. When the serpent was touched by the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, he regained his previous body and was freed from the reactions of his sinful activities. When Lord Caitanya thus heard Himself equated with Kṛṣṇa, He mildly protested. He wanted to warn people in general not to compare the Supreme Lord with any living entity, and although He was the Supreme Lord Himself, He protested against this comparison in order to teach us.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Krsna Book 87:

The entrance of the Supreme Lord into everyone's heart as Paramātmā sometimes bewilders the impersonalists into equating the living entities with the Supreme Lord. They think, "Both the Supreme Lord and the individual soul enter into the various bodies; so where is the distinction? Why should individual souls worship the Paramātmā, or Supersoul?" According to them, the Supersoul and the individual soul are on the same level; they are one, without any difference between them. There is a difference, however, between the Supersoul and the individual soul, and this is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, Fifteenth Chapter, wherein the Lord says that although He is situated with the living entity in the same body, He is superior. He is dictating or giving intelligence to the individual soul from within.

Krsna Book 87:

The limbs of a material body can perform only a particular function; for example, the hands can hold but cannot see or hear. But because the body of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is made of ānanda-cinmaya-rasa and is thus sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), He can enjoy anything and do everything with any of His limbs. Acceptance of the spiritual body of the Lord as material is dictated by the tendency to equate the Supreme Personality of Godhead with the conditioned soul. The conditioned soul has a material body. Therefore, if God also has a material body, then the impersonalistic theory that the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the living entities are one and the same can be very easily propagated.

Factually, when the Supreme Personality of Godhead comes He exhibits a nonmaterial body, and thus there is no difference between His childish body when He is lying on the lap of His mother Yaśodā and His so-called grown-up body fighting with the demons.

Renunciation Through Wisdom

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.13:

The austerities a monist performs are painful both during the initial stage of practice (sādhana) and when he has supposedly reached perfection. The impersonalists suffer excruciating pains trying to establish the oneness of matter and spirit through speculative theories. Thinking that Brahman is impotent, through sophistry they try to equate the Lord's inferior, material energy with His superior, spiritual energy, thus reaping ridicule from truly learned circles. In attempting to prove that the Absolute Truth cannot be the Supreme Personality of Godhead with unlimited energies, they argue that this would mean immutable Brahman is actually mutable. Thus their logic loses all cohesion and they become a laughingstock.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 3.1:

The dry speculators describe the field and its knower according to their own lopsided logic. They say that the body is like a container and that Brahman enters this container like the all-pervasive sky. Once this container is broken—that is, at the time of liberation—the jīva merges back into Brahman, symbolized by the sky. There are many loopholes in this argument. First of all, the jīva is spiritual energy, while the sky is matter. It is wrong to compare a spiritual subject to a material object. This is a typical example of how the impersonal speculators waste their time trying to equate spiritual substance with mundane things. Such empirical exercises can never be termed jñāna-yoga, the path of perfect knowledge.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 3.4:

Maharshi of Madras was asked by a foreign disciple, "What is the difference between God and man?" His cryptic reply was "God plus desire equals man, and man minus desire equals God." We say that man can never be free of desire. In his eternal conditioned existence the jīva is full of the desire to enjoy matter, while in his eternal liberated state he is full of the desire to render devotional service to the Lord. Thus the jīva can never become God. It is sheer insanity to equate man with God, or vice versa. The Māyāvādī's unnatural desire to deny the inherent characteristics of his conscious self is the very same desire that keeps him from attaining liberation.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 3.5:

Where can one see qualities such as intelligence, knowledge, freedom from doubt, joy, sorrow, fear, fearlessness, nonviolence, equanimity, contentment, austerity, charity, fame, and infamy? These qualities are indicative of consciousness, so they are present wherever consciousness is present. The Supreme Lord has declared that these qualities are His, that they have sprung from Him. And the Kaṭha Upaniṣad states, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko bahūnāṁ yo vidadhāti kāmān: "Among all the eternal, conscious living entities, there is one supreme conscious being who supplies all others with their necessities." Therefore, to deny that these qualities are inherent in all conscious beings, and in this way to equate both the minute living entities and the Supreme Soul with dead matter, results in complete confusion and certainly demonstrates a severe lack of insight.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.3:

Since Dr. Radhakrishnan implies that the impersonal Brahman alone possesses such transcendental qualities as being inexhaustible, imperishable, and unborn, we must turn to the Gītā for a proper reply. In truth, all the divine expansions of the nondual Supreme Being are endowed with these same superexcellent qualities. As Arjuna declares in the Bhagavad-gītā (11.18),

tvam akṣaraṁ paramaṁ veditavyaṁ
tvam asya viśvasya paraṁ nidhānam
tvam avyayaḥ śāśvata-dharma-goptā
sanātanas tvaṁ puruṣo mato me

You are the supreme primeval objective. You are the ultimate resting place of all this universe. You are inexhaustible, and You are the oldest. You are the maintainer of the eternal religion, the Personality of Godhead. This is my opinion.

We should understand that those passages in the Gītā which describe Parabrahman as akṣara ("indestructible") are references to Lord Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Controller Godhead. Not once is Lord Kṛṣṇa equated with the kṣara, the conditioned jīvas.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.3:

It is a well known scriptural truth that the words Brahman and Paramātmā refer ultimately to Lord Kṛṣṇa and that Kṛṣṇa is the principle name of the Supreme Absolute Person. But even when the Māyāvādīs chant such names of God as Kṛṣṇa, Govinda, or Hari, they do so not with the understanding and faith that these names are God's principal names and that they are nondifferent from the Supreme Lord, but rather with the idea that chanting them is a temporary means of sādhana, or spiritual practice. They also do not admit that such chanting of the holy name is an offence. Of course, their biggest offence is to distinguish between Lord Kṛṣṇa and His form. Thus in the Gītā (9.11), Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself condemns these offenders:

avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā
mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam
paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto
mama bhūta-maheśvaram

Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be.

Let us study how Dr. Radhakrishnan has translated this verse, which appears on page 242 of his book: "The deluded despise Me clad in human body, not knowing My higher nature as Lord of all existences." In other words, when the person who is "Lord of all existences" is "clad in human body," those who see from a materialistic perspective take Him for an ordinary mortal, while those who see from a spiritual perspective understand that He is the Supreme Being, the cause of all causes. So if it is the deluded who despise Lord Kṛṣṇa, then is it not time for Dr. Radhakrishnan himself to admit that he is guilty of this crime? Let him realize how he has abused the "Lord of all existences," equating Him with a mere mortal. When we see how such big scholars are inimical toward Lord Kṛṣṇa, we can conclude, following the Gītā, that their intelligence has been stolen by māyā.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 5.1:

The moment the spirit soul surrenders completely at the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord and prays to Him for engagement in His loving devotional service, the soul is freed from the bondage of fruitive reactions. In this stage he proves the truth of the scriptural injunction jīvera svarūpa haya kṛṣṇera nitya-dāsa: (CC Madhya 20.108) "In his original spiritual identity, the spirit soul is an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa." This position gives the soul immense bliss. It is wrong to equate the position of an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa with that of a slave of māyā, the illusory potency of Kṛṣṇa. In other words, the feelings of power and pleasure gained by lording it over matter are insignificant compared to the ecstacy one feels in the Lord's service.

Light of the Bhagavata

Light of the Bhagavata 20, Purport:

These atheists are all against the revealed scriptures because such persons are intimately attached to sense pleasures and gross materialism. There are also others who do not believe in the eternity of life. Some of them propose that life is ultimately to be annihilated and that only the material energy is conserved. Others are less concerned with physical laws but do not believe anything beyond their experience. And still others equate spirit and matter and declare the distinction between them to be illusory.

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG 1.21-22 -- London, July 18, 1973:

We have to take things from the śāstra. In the Bhagavad-gītā also woman's position has been equated with śūdra. Striyaḥ śūdrās tathā vaiśyas te 'pi yānti parāṁ gatim. So position must be ascertained. But this position is artificial. Here either woman or man, they are in artificial position. Because a woman may be in women's dress, but her mind is like man. She also wants to enjoy. And the others, the so-called man.... The so-called man is also not man; he is woman. Prakṛti. Apareyam itas tu viddhi me prakṛtiṁ parā (BG 7.5). Prakṛti. As the earth, water, air, fire, sky, they are also controlled, the supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa, similarly, the so-called man or woman in this material world, they are also controlled.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 5.5.26 -- Vrndavana, November 13, 1976:

"The humble sage, by virtue of true knowledge, sees with equal vision a learned and gentle brāhmaṇa, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater or outcaste." (Bg 5.18) This sama-darśinaḥ, equal vision, should not be mistaken to mean that the individual is the same as the Supreme Lord. They are always distinct. Every individual person is different from the Supreme Lord. It is a mistake to equate the individual living entity with the Supreme Lord on the plea of vivikta-dṛk, sama-dṛk. The Lord is always in an exalted position, even though He agrees to live everywhere.

Lecture on SB 5.5.34 -- Vrndavana, November 21, 1976:

So far the body is concerned, it has nothing to do with the spiritual activities. The body is as good as that of the animals, the crows and the cows, birds, beasts. He is showing the same now, that so far body is concerned, it is the same thing. But when you come to the spiritual platform, that is... This is negation or equation with the material body. But real activities are ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānuśīlanaṁ bhaktir uttama. Simply be ready to work for Kṛṣṇa, sad-dharma-pṛcchāt, as Sanātana Gosvāmī exemplified.

Correspondence

1971 Correspondence

Letter to Jaya Jagadisa -- Bombay 24 April, 1971:

Please regularly chant the Hare Krsna Mahamantra sixteen rounds daily and follow the regulative principles faithfully. By observing the four restrictions and avoiding the ten offenses to the Holy Name (i.e. blaspheming the Lord's devotee, considering the Lord and the demigods as being on the same level, neglecting the orders of the Spiritual Master, minimizing the authority of the sastras, interpreting the Holy Name of God, committing sins on the strength of chanting, instructing the glories of the Lord to the unfaithful, equating the chanting of the Holy Names with material piety, inattention while chanting of the Holy Name and maintaining attachment to material things while engaged in chanting the Holy Names) you will become qualified to receive the mercy of the Lord and thus advance yourself in His transcendental loving service, which is the perfect stage of transcendental life of bhaktirasa life.

Page Title:Equate
Compiler:Sahadeva, Priya
Created:02 of Jan, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=1, SB=8, CC=13, OB=11, Lec=3, Con=0, Let=1
No. of Quotes:37