Hayagrīva: He says, "The concept of God as a separate substance is impossible and contradictory."
Prabhupāda: God is everything. There is no question of separation. That is defined in the Bhagavad-gītā, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam, "I am everything." So how He can be separate?
Hayagrīva: But he rejects God as a separate person.
Prabhupāda: He may reject, but God is everything. How he can reject God? The, the, these are the defects of speculators. They cannot give us tangible leading. That because they are defective themselves, so whatever interpretation they will give, all defective.
Hayagrīva: Oh, he would agree that God is everything.
Prabhupāda: That God is..., how he can reject? If God is everything, then how can he reject?
Hayagrīva: But he would not say that God is more than the creation.
Prabhupāda: So how everything He can create? You cannot create the Pacific Ocean, but Pacific Ocean is God. So you are limited, why you are trying to create God? God is already there. Everything is God. Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam (BG 9.4). Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. How he can reject God? Because the table is God, table is God and table is staying on God... The same example: the earthen pot is also earth and it is kept on earth. So earth both of them are. The earthen pot, a tumbler, and waterpot made of earth, everything is made of earth. This table is made of earth and it is staying on earth. So what you can reject?
Hayagrīva: But he rejects God's transcendental nature, and when you...
Prabhupāda: That thing is that everything is God, just I have given the example. The floor is God, the table is God. Now which you can reject?
Hayagrīva: He wouldn't disagree with that.
Prabhupāda: Then where is the rejection of God?
Hayagrīva: He would reject the transcendental personality.
Prabhupāda: Then as soon as you accept that everything is God, what you can reject?
Hayagrīva: The transcendental personality separate from the creation.
Prabhupāda: Transcendental also God. As soon as you say everything is God, then that, what you call transcendental, and not transcendental, that is also God. Then how you can reject? If everything is God, how you can reject anything? Sarvaṁ khalu idaṁ brahma. There is no question of... The same example: if everything is made of earth, then where is the question of? My body is also earth. So what you can reject? That is our philosophy. We don't reject. We see God in everything. Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam (ISO 1). That is intelligence. And Rūpa Goswami said that prāpañcikatayā buddhyā hari-sambandhi-vastunaḥ, that there is everything is related with God. If we think, "This is matter, this is spirit," that is my speculation. That we have to see how God is there and how everything... Material means when you forget God. That is material.
Hayagrīva: Yet we concentrate on the personality of Kṛṣṇa.
Prabhupāda: But that is..., that requires little brain. Those who are less intelligent or those practically no brain, simply cow dung, for them it is little difficult. Therefore this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is to cleanse this cow dung and make the brain pure. Then he will understand. Otherwise he is thinking God, "A person like me." But God is not like that. God is goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto (Bs. 5.37). He is person. He is in Vṛndāvana, Goloka Vṛndāvana, He is dancing with gopīs, playing with the cowherd boys—still He is everywhere. Not that "Now I am dancing I have no time to go everywhere." That is not. He may be engaged in dancing, but still He is everywhere, īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-de... (BG 18.61). Now if He is in Goloka Vṛndāvana only, a person like us, then how He can say that patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā (BG 9.26)? We are offering some dates to Kṛṣṇa, so He is in Goloka Vṛndāvana, He may say, "I am now busy. How can I go to your temple and eat?" No. He is also temple, in the temple also. That is God. He is everywhere. Goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto (Bs. 5.37). This is definition, akhilātma-bhūto. So he has no conception of God. He cannot imagine God. He must take the understanding... (break) ...because they have no standard knowledge. Everyone is manufacturing, so then there must be difference, because everyone is imperfect. You propose something imperfect, I propose something imperfect, so there must be disagreement.