Kṛṣṇa, or God, says that "I am expanded in My impersonal form everywhere. Everything is existing on account of Me. But still, I am not everything." Just like God has expanded in this microphone. The microphone is also expansion of God's energy, but that does not mean we have to worship the microphone. So God has got that power, that although He has expanded Himself in His impersonal form everywhere, still, He has got His original existence. A small example can be given in this connection. Just like a father. He has given birth to hundreds of children. That does not mean the father is finished. These children is expansion of the father, but father keeps himself as father. So in this way He is Vāsudeva, means He is present everywhere. He says in the Bhagavad-gītā, sarvataḥ pāṇi-pādaṁ tat: "He has got His hands and legs and eyes everywhere." Because the part and parcel expansion of God, either viṣṇu-tattva or jīva-tattva, they are everywhere.
Impersonal (Lectures, SB)
Expressions researched:
"imperson"
|"impersonal"
|"impersonally"
Lectures
Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures
They don't want varieties. Because they have got a very bad experience of the varieties in the material world, they, as soon as there is question of varieties, they become shuddered, "Oh, again varieties?" They do not know that there is blissful varieties in association with Kṛṣṇa. They can not accommodate in their brain on account of poor fund of knowledge. Therefore they want sāyujya-mukti, to merge into the existence of the..., to become one with the Supreme. That is possible. You can have it. But it you lose your individuality then you can get eternity, but you cannot get blissful life of knowledge, because you lose your individuality. So that is suicidal. But a living entity being individual soul, he cannot remain in that impersonal state of life. Because the other two factors, namely acquire knowledge and acquire blissful life, is wanting there. It is simply negation of these material varieties. Or eternity only—sat. But there are two other parts, cit and ānanda. That is absent there.
He is pulling the wire. Just like the doll dancing, there is a man pulling the wire. These are the descriptions in the śāstras, or Vedic literatures. So we should not equalize or we should not place the demigods on the same level with God. That is offense. The Māyāvādīs, because they think that "God is formless, impersonal, but I cannot meditate upon anything which is formless. So let me imagine something." That is their theory. They say, "Let me imagine a form of God." Sādhakānāṁ hitārthāya brahmaṇo rūpa-kalpanaḥ. Kalpana, "imagine." The Māyāvādī philosophy is that, that "You imagine a form of God. Actually, there is no form of God." That is then theory. And we say, "No. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). He has got form, but not a form like me." That we know. It is a different type of form. Different material. Or we don't say material: different ingredient, spirit, complete spirit.
So impersonal concept of God is imperfect conception of God. That is not perfect. They are puzzled because Kṛṣṇa, God, is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1). They cannot imagine that a form of sac-cid-ānanda can be possible. That is their lack of knowledge. But we learn from Vedic literature that God has got form, complete form, like us. Just like Kṛṣṇa, you see, He has got also two hands, He is also playing flute, with consort, Rādhārāṇī. He has also got two hands, nice face, nice head. Everything is there. Only the ingredients are different. These ingredients, at the present moment... I have also got form, spiritual form. You have also spiritual form. Now that spiritual form is covered by material dress. Just like my body is covered by this shirt. You cannot see the actual body. Similarly, the spiritual body is now covered by this material body; therefore we cannot see. Besides that, our present eyes, that is also material. So with material eyes, we cannot see God. But God has got form. That's a fact. Now we are unable to see. Therefore the process is that we have to purify our eyes, our legs, our hands, and everything, so that we may be able to serve God.
Prabhupāda: Don't close your eyes.
Pradyumna: "...just seven days before the King's death. Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī was a liberated soul from his very birth. He was liberated even in the womb of his mother, and he did not undergo any sort of spiritual training after his birth. At birth no one is qualified, neither in the mundane nor in the spiritual sense. But Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī, due to his being a perfectly liberated soul, did not have to undergo an evolutionary process for spiritual realization. Yet despite his being a completely liberated person situated in the transcendental position above the three material modes, he was attracted to this transcendental rasa of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is adored by liberated souls who sing Vedic hymns. The Supreme Lord's pastimes are more attractive to liberated souls than to mundane people. He is of necessity not impersonal, because it is only possible to carry on transcendental rasa with a person. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam the transcendental pastimes of the Lord are narrated, and the narration is systematically depicted by Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Thus the subject matter is appealing to all classes of persons, including those who seek liberation and those who seek to become one with the Supreme Whole. In Sanskrit the parrot is also known as śuka. When a ripened fruit is cut by the red beaks of such birds, its sweet flavor is enhanced. The Vedic fruit which is mature and ripe in knowledge is spoken through the lips of Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī, who is compared to the parrot not for his ability to recite the Bhāgavatam exactly as he heard it from his learned father, but for his ability to present the work in a manner that would appeal to all classes of men. The subject matter is so presented through the lips of Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī that any sincere listener that hears submissively can at once relish transcendental tastes which are distinct from the perverted tastes of the material world. The ripened fruit is not dropped all of a sudden from the highest planet of Kṛṣṇaloka. Rather, it has come down carefully through the chain of disciplic succession without change or disturbance. Foolish people who are not in the transcendental disciplic succession commit great blunders by trying to understand the highest transcendental rasa known as the rāsa dance without following in the footsteps of Śukadeva Gosvāmī, who presents this fruit very carefully by stages of transcendental realization. One should be intelligent to know the position of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam by considering personalities like Śukadeva Gosvāmī, who deals with the subject so carefully. This process of disciplic succession of the Bhāgavata school suggests that in the future also Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam has to be understood from a person who is factually a representative of Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī. A professional man who makes a business out of reciting the Bhāgavatam illegally is certainly not a representative of Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Such a man's business is only to earn his livelihood. Therefore one should refrain from hearing the lectures of such professional men. Such men usually go to the most confidential part of the literature without undergoing the gradual process of understanding this grave subject."
Prabhupāda: In India there is a class, they are professional Bhāgavata reciters. They make contract that he shall recite Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, finish within a week, and he should be rewarded. These things are not recommended in the authoritative scriptures. We should follow the footsteps of Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī. He's explaining Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from the very beginning. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Try to understand the philosophy of Bhāgavata. Then gradually, when you are accustomed to understand what is Kṛṣṇa, then go to the Tenth Canto, wherein Kṛṣṇa's rāsa dance is described. Without reading in the beginning what is Kṛṣṇa, if we all of a sudden jump over to understand the rāsa dance... That is a very natural tendency. No, we should not go like that. First of all, try to understand what is Kṛṣṇa. To understand Kṛṣṇa is very difficult subject matter. But by the grace of Lord Caitanya we can understand little about Kṛṣṇa. And then gradually... Of course, the ultimate goal is to enter into the pastimes of Lord Kṛṣṇa. But not by speculation or by material misconception. Gradually, step by step. Prādurbhāve bhavet kramaḥ.
He has got His form. God has got His form. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think the Absolute Truth is impersonal. Śūnyavādi. No. Absolute cannot be zero or impersonal because controller, controller must have brain. Without brain, how he can control? And as soon as you have got brain, you have got other limbs of the body to carry out the order of the brain. So as soon as you have got senses, as soon as you have got sense organs, as soon as you have got brain, as soon as you have got activities, you are a person. This is the conclusion of the śāstra. Therefore the absolute controller cannot be impersonal. By our practical life we see, government. "Government" is an impersonal word, but at the end of the government, there is a governor or president, a person. A person is required, who will apply his brain. So how is that that without brain the whole cosmic manifestation it is controlled? That is not very reasonable. And that is not according to śāstra.
Unfortunately, they have no information of the Supreme Lord. Although the Lord, the Supreme Lord Kṛṣṇa, is present, still, they are thinking that Supreme Lord is nirākāra. Nirākāra means to avoid. How Supreme God can be nirākāra? If the Supreme Lord is the supreme father... We have got experience: I am a person, my father is person, his father is person, his father is person... In this way, if you go to the topmost platform to find out the Supreme Person or Supreme God, why He should be imperson? Imperson is a feature of the Supreme Person, but ultimately brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11), ultimately the Absolute Truth is a Supreme Person. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). This is the Vedic information, that as we are all nityas, eternal, we are also living being, but there is another supreme nitya, eternal, and supreme cetana, or living being, and that is God. That is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya: (BG 7.7) "There is no more superior living being than Me." That is Kṛṣṇa.
Sometimes we say, "Can you show me God?" This is called akṣaja. But He cannot be seen by these eyes; therefore His name is Adhokṣaja. Adhah-kṛtaḥ akṣajaṁ jñānam. You cannot see God by direct perception. You have to create your eyes, you have to create your senses, so that you can see God, you can touch God, you can talk with God, you can feel God's presence. Therefore His name is Adhokṣaja. When sometimes God is described as impersonal, that does not mean that He has no personality. He has His personality, but He is not a person like us. He is not a person like us. That is called impersonal. Impersonal does not mean that He has no personality, but the experience of our personality, God is not like that. In the Vedas they are very nicely explained, paśyaty acakṣuḥ: "God sees, but He has no eyes." Śṛṇoty akarṇaḥ: "He has no ears, but He can hear." If He cannot hear, then what is the use of our offering prayer? He hears, but He does not hear like us. We cannot hear in a distant place, a few yards. But God, He is in His kingom.
That's all. So dharmaḥ svanuṣṭhitaḥ puṁsām. In the human society, there is always some kinds of religious institution. That is called dharma, faith. Real dharma means—that I have already explained—occupational duty. Constitutional duty, that is called dharma, functional duty. So real dharma, real religion is to become servant of God, or to render service to God. That is real religion. But we have manufactured so many religions. Different societies, different circumstances, different country. Therefore it is advised herewith that you may execute any kind of religious faith or (break) ...principle, but the result should be (break) ...perfect. You can say, "I am very perfectly executing the ritualistic ceremonies, and the tenets described in my scripture, Bible or Veda or Koran." That's very good. But what is the result? The result is that you must develop or increase your tendency to hear about God. But if your ultimate truth is impersonal Mostly they consider God has no form. Then if God has no form then what he'll hear about Him. Simply formless, formless, formless. How can you, how long you can go thinking like this, "God is formless"? If God is formless, then your idea of hearing about Him is finished, because formless, there is nothing, activities.
So that talks of God is here in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, because our God is not impersonal, void. No. He is the Supreme Person, Kṛṣṇa. You can see personally how He's standing, how He's enjoying with His eternal consort, lover, Śrīmate Rādhārāṇī. Here is God, actually God is not engaged in punishing somebody, original God. God is engaged in enjoying with His eternal consort, Śrīmate Rādhārāṇī. This Śrīmate Rādhārāṇī is enchanting Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa is enchanting Rādhārāṇī. This is the business of God. Duhe (indistinct) lage hari (?). In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta it is said that when Kṛṣṇa comes before Rādhārāṇī, She becomes so much engladdened by seeing the beauty of Kṛṣṇa that She becomes more beautiful, and as soon as Rādhārāṇī becomes beautiful, Kṛṣṇa becomes engladdened and He becomes more beautiful. So unlimitedly there is competition of becoming more beautiful, duhe lage hurai (?). That is the state. Competition. Because in the spiritual world everything is unlimited. So unlimitedly both of them becoming beautiful and both of them enjoying unlimitedly.
So we immediately understand that this brahma-jyotir, impersonal effulgence of brahma-jyotir is the rays of Kṛṣṇa's body. Yasya prabhā (Bs. 5.40). Kṛṣṇa also confirms this in the Bhagavad-gītā: brahmaṇo 'haṁ pratiṣṭhā. Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ (BG 10.8). Kṛṣṇa says everything is emanating from Him. The Brahman is also emanation from Him. Paramātmā is also expansion of Kṛṣṇa.
Another example is: just like if you see a mountain. Just like surrounding your this place, Tirupati, there are so many hills. From the distant place, your vision is not clear. You simply see something like cloudy, the same mountain. But if you make little further progress, you see the same mountain or hill greenish. And if you actually go in the same hill, you will find there are so many animals, so many men and so many houses. So object is the same, but from different angle vision, it appears differently. Similarly, unless one can understand Kṛṣṇa perfectly, he realizes the Absolute Truth as impersonal, nirākāra Brahman. Unless one understands Kṛṣṇa perfectly well, he cannot understand what is Paramātmā, which is realized by yogic principles. But when you understand Kṛṣṇa, then you understand Paramātmā and Brahman also. This is the verdict of the śāstra. Just like if you have got one lakh of rupees, your possession of few thousands of rupees or few hundred of rupees are already there.
That is stated in the Bhāgavata. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). There are certain persons, they are thinking, "Now I have become liberated." Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. Vimukta-māninaḥ means "thinking that they have become liberated." But aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ, their intelligence is not yet clear. So what is the result? Suppose one realizes Brahman realization. He is not mukta? Yes, he is mukta. That's all right. But the intelligence is not yet purified. Why? Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ (SB 10.2.32). After undergoing sever austerities and penances, they rise up to the Brahmaloka, paraṁ padam. Patanty adhaḥ, again falls down, again falls down. Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Just like the impersonal sky. You can go in the sky with your seedy airplane, but if you don't get a shelter in any planet, you will have to come again. Just like this moon planet-goers, going and coming. Why don't they stay there? So it doubtful whether they are going.
So to become Kṛṣṇa conscious, that is the highest perfection of life. Paraṁ Brahman. Paraṁ Brahman. Brahman, impersonal effulgence. Just like the sunshine. Then localized sun, the sun globe. Then further, if you able to enter the sun globe, you'll find there is a predominating deity. There are also cities and palaces—everything, just like this planet. But this planet is made prominently of earth, and that planet is one of the elements, material elements, earth, water, fire, air. So if this planet is made of earth, why not other planet made of fire? What is the scientific reason to deny it? Because I cannot live in the fire, it does not mean other living entities cannot live there. There are different kinds of living entities. Just like you cannot live within the water, within the ocean, but there are other living entities... Just like fish. They live very comfortably within the water. So why should we conclude that there is no life in the sun planet or moon planet? This is not perfect knowledge. From Vedic books we can understand that this moon planet is one of the heavenly planets and people live there. They are demigods. Their duration of life is very long.
So Kṛṣṇa says therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā, nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yogamāyā-samāvṛtaḥ (BG 7.25). Simply by becoming brāhmaṇa, one cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. He must become a devotee. Because Kṛṣṇa is understood by simply devotional service. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti (BG 18.55). Kṛṣṇa does not say that to "By becoming brāhmaṇa, one can understand Me." No. Brāhmaṇa stage is impersonal realization of Brahman. There is no personal realization. When the personal realization is there, he's called Vaiṣṇava, brāhmaṇa-vaiṣṇava. The brāhmaṇa has got two titles: brāhmaṇa-paṇḍita. Still, in India, a brāhmaṇa is addressed as paṇḍita, however rascal he may be. Because it is expected, when one is born in the brāhmaṇa family, he must be well-learned. These are the six occupational duties of brāhmaṇa: paṭhana-pāṭhana yajana-yājana dāna-pratigraha. A brāhmaṇa must be very learned scholar, studying. All Vedic knowledge is meant for the brāhmaṇas. Satyam, tapasya, satyam, śaucam, tapas, ārjavam, titikṣā, jñānam, vijñānam, āstikyam, brahma-karma svabhāva-jam (BG 18.42). These qualifications must be there to become a brāhmaṇa.
We are also part and parcel of sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha. Vigraha means form. Sac-cid-ānanda does not mean impersonal. That is foolishness, another foolishness. Ānanda cannot be impersonal. You can make experiment. Suppose if you are put into a big room without any man coming there, so you cannot feel very comfortable for long time. You will feel lonely. You shall try to come out. Just like we have got experience. Everyone has got experience, when we rise very high in the sky, but we cannot remain in that condition more than, utmost, eight to ten hours. Then we become very restless. Although it is very high in the sky, but we cannot remain in that way. Therefore śāstra says,
- ...āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ
- patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ
- (SB 10.2.32)
One who does not take shelter of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, he may rise up very high by austerity and penance, but he cannot remain in that position. He may give up artificially this material world, jagan mithyā, but he has to come down again to this mithyā jagat and open schools and hospitals, because he cannot remain in that impersonal way. That is the experience. All so-called brahmavādī, they say that "We have become liberated" but not liberated. That is simply concoction, vimukta-māninaḥ. They think like that. Actually they are not liberated. Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. Without being liberated, when one speaks that "I have become liberated," that means aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ: the intelligence is not clear. He does not know what is liberation. Liberation means prasanna-manasa, full of joyfulness, that is liberation. Evaṁ prasanna-manasaḥ, bhagavat-tattva-vijñānam (SB 1.2.20). Tattva means truth. You have to understand Bhagavān in truth.
Manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu kaścid yatati siddhaye. And yatatām api siddhānām (BG 7.3). It is not that coming to the platform of a qualified brāhmaṇa, one can understand Kṛṣṇa. That is also not. Still, you have to go farther. Brahma-bhūta. Brahmā jānāti iti brāhmaṇaḥ. Brāhmaṇa can understand Brahman. He can understand that he is also part and parcel of Brahman. But that understanding is not sufficient. He has to go further, to become a Vaiṣṇava, to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Absolute Truth, as person. Vaiṣṇava means to understand the Absolute Truth as person, not imperson. In the brāhmaṇa state, even they understand Brahman, that is impersonal view. But one has to go far above. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). One has to make progress from the Brahman platform to Paramātmā platform, then to the Personality of Godhead understanding. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, yatatām api siddhānām (BG 7.3). Somebody is trying to come to the platform of brahma-bhūta (SB 4.30.20) stage. That is called siddha state. But yatatām api siddhānāṁ kaścid vetti māṁ tattvataḥ (BG 7.3). So they also cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa can be understood only by this process, bhagavad-bhakti-yogataḥ.
Yes. One can speculate about the Absolute Truth to certain extent. Therefore, generally, these speculators become impersonalists. Because they cannot go beyond that. But that impersonal knowledge is not complete. As we have several times stressed on this point, one has to go further, onward: realization of Paramātmā, realization of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. But they stop only in impersonal view. That's all. Go on.
Yaṁ brahmā. Brahmā is the original living creature within this universe; so he worshiped the Supreme Lord, Personality of Godhead. He worshiped not the impersonal brahma-jyotir; he worshiped the person. Yaṁ brahmā varuṇendra—they were the first creation, and the sages Marīci, Vasiṣṭha, Ātreya... There are seven great sages, first-born. All of them worship the Personality of Godhead. Bhejire munayo 'thāgre. Agra means in the beginning of creation. Later on they have deviated, or as the ages are going on, people are becoming degraded in their standard of spiritual understanding. In the Satya-yuga, cent percent people were aware of their spiritual necessity of life. Next yuga, seventy-five percent. Next yuga, fifty percent, fifty percent; and this yuga, Kali-yuga, seventy-five percent are rascals, and twenty-five percent, they are little wise. And out of that twenty-five percent, mostly they are fruitive actors. Therefore Bhagavad-gītā says manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu (BG 7.3).
So bhejire munayaḥ athāgre bhagavantam adhokṣajam. There are some theories—that is not fact—that ultimately the Absolute Truth is impersonal. But here we find that agre, in the beginning, after creation, all the sages... First of all, there was Brahmā. And then he created so many saintly persons. Marīcyādi, great sages. And they also engaged themselves in worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Not impersonal, from the very beginning. Bhejire munayaḥ atha agre. From the very beginning. Bhagavantam adhokṣajam. Adhokṣajam, we have described many times: "beyond our sense perception." The Absolute Truth is a person, it is very difficult to understand. "Beyond our sense perception." They, generally they think that "How a person can create such huge cosmic manifestation?" That is their bewilderment. They cannot accommodate, accommodate in the teeny, poor brain that the original Absolute Truth is a person. That is their problem. So their idea is that by personal worship, one has to reach again to the impersonal transcendence. But we don't find from the śāstra like that. Now, the most authentic śāstra is Vedānta. Vedānta is accepted by all classes of men. Because without accepting Vedānta, nobody will be bona fide. Generally they think that the impersonalists are Vedantists. Generally they think, but that's a wrong conception. They... All the Vaiṣṇava—Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya—they are also Vedantists. Caitanya Mahāprabhu is Vedantist. We are also Vedantist. It is not that Vedānta is the monopoly of the impersonalists. No.
So simply thinking, concocting, is one thing. And fact is another. Fact is that we are teeny, part and parcel of the Absolute Truth. But we are not actually absolute. We are relative. Relative truth. On the existence of the Absolute Truth, we are existing, but we have no independent existence, neither we have got independent knowledge. We are all dependent. The independent knowledge, Absolute Truth, is Kṛṣṇa. Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya. That is the beginning of Vedānta-sūtra. Therefore, bhejire munayo 'thāgre bhagavantam adhokṣajam. Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, beyond the sense perception. This impersonal concept of the Absolute Truth is in negation of the material duality. But that is not absolute knowledge. Absolute knowledge is that when we reach bhagavantam adhokṣajam. Sattvaṁ viśuddham. His existence is viśuddha, not contaminated. Our existence in this material existence, this is not viśuddha. This is contaminated by the modes of material nature. But His existence is viśuddha. Even Śaṅkarācārya, he says, in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā: nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. Vyaktāvyakta. There are two material features: manifested and nonmanifested. Śaṅkarācārya agrees that Nārāyaṇa... As soon as he says "Nārāyaṇa," he means the person, person, the Supreme Person. Paraḥ avyaktāt. He's transcendental. His person is not the same person, personality as we have got.
The modern fashion is that they want to become God by meditation, by advancement of mystic power. But that kind of God is not Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa does not become God; He's God always. Others, they try to become God by mystic power. We have heard so many so-called Gods, that "He attained such perfection of mystic power. Now he has become God." That is also another māyā. Nobody can become God. God is God; dog is dog. This is the law of identity. A dog cannot become God, neither God becomes dog. This is Māyāvāda theory that at the end the Absolute Truth is void, or impersonal. The Buddhist theory is void and the Māyāvādī theory is impersonal. But our philosophy is that God is originally the Supreme Person. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). We have discussed this point many times.
So in the Vedas, in the Purāṇas, in the Upaniṣads, and confirmed by great sages, saintly persons, everyone accepts Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Then why these rascals cannot find out God? We are giving the name of God, the address of God, the father, God's father's name also, Nanda-nandana, Devakī-nandana. So where is the difficulty to find out? There is no difficulty. But the rascals will not accept. They will continue their rascaldom. That is the difficulty. Otherwise, it is not at all difficulty to find out where is God. God is neither dead, nor God has become void or impersonal. He's person, dvi-bhuja-muralīdhara, Kṛṣṇa, playing on His flute and jāmuna-tīra-vana-cārī. He is existent always. Adyāpi kare līlāya gaura-rāya, kona kona bhāgyavān dekhibāre pāya(?). Kṛṣṇa is always existing. Kṛṣṇa's incarnations are always existing, before us. But if we are fortunate enough, we can see; otherwise not.
So ādau, in the beginning, loka-sisṛkṣayā, for creating the cosmology, jagṛhe pauruṣaṁ rūpam, person, the creation is coming from the person. Not from imperson. The modern scientists, their theory of creation... "There was something matter chunk," or something like that. What do they say? What was the beginning of creation, Hayagrīva Prabhu?
But here we find it quite reasonable. Because everything is, is from the person. Jagṛhe pauruṣaṁ rūpam. Rūpam, form. It is not from imperson. Jagṛhe pauruṣaṁ rūpam. So we don't theorize. We accept the statement of the Vedas. That is our process of knowledge. Eh? Descending process. We take knowledge from the authority. Of course, the scientists also say they take from authority, but originally, as explained by our Hayagrīva Prabhu, it does not appear that the knowledge was taken from authority. It is theory. Theory, one can put theory of his own, and there are so many theories. But we don't accept theories. We want solid fact.
So here we see that you can have God as your son. There are so many instances. Just like Devakī got Kṛṣṇa as his (her) son; Mother Yaśodā got God as his (her) son; Śacī-mātā, (s)he also got Caitanya Mahāprabhu as son. So this is better philosophy than to accept God as father. That is especially in the Vaiṣṇava philosophy. Others, the impersonalist, voidists, they have no conception of God. Voidists—"Ultimately everything is zero," and the impersonalists, "God has no form." Both are the same thing, in a different language. The voidists, they say, "Ultimately there is nothing but zero," and the impersonalists statement that "Maybe something, but it is not person, it is imperson."
So indrāri-vyākulaṁ lokaṁ mṛḍayanti yuge yuge. He's always giving protection to the devotees. Don't be afraid. And another thing is that ete ca aṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ. Puṁsaḥ means the person, the Supreme Person. So the Māyāvādī rascals' theory is that the Absolute Truth is impersonal, and when He comes to be present before us as person, He accepts a material body. This is their theory, māyā, Māyāvāda, that Kṛṣṇa's body is also bone and skin. That is their theory. They accept, "Yes, Kṛṣṇa is God, but He has accepted a body of flesh and bone." This is Māyāvāda theory. But the śāstra does not say. Kṛṣṇa Himself says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam: (BG 9.11) "These rascals, they also consider Me like one ordinary human being because I have come here just like human being." He, He has said, mūḍho nābhijānāti: "Deride at Me." This is their... To consider Kṛṣṇa's body as made of flesh and bone, that means minimizing the value of Kṛṣṇa. Dr. Radhakrishnan has done it. No.
Puṁsaḥ, here it is said. Ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ (SB 1.3.28). The incarnation... When some incarnation comes, He's expansion of the person, not that He accepts this material body. Ete ca aṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ. The, all the descriptions of the incarnations have been given before this verse. So therefore, it is concluding that "All these incarnations, they are expansion of the spiritual body of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Not that the Absolute Truth is imperson, and He, He's accepting a form with material body. No. That is not. That is not. Just like here, Deity. He is also expansion, arcā-vigraha. Arcā-avatāra. Don't think that it is made of stone or metal. It is expansion of Kṛṣṇa. You want to worship. Kṛṣṇa has expanded Himself to come here to accept your service. Don't think it is made of stone. So ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28).
So (Sanskrit commentary:) kiṁ ca yat sanātanaṁ nityaṁ paraṁ brahma ca tac ca tvayā jijñāsitaṁ vicaritam adhītam adhigataṁ prāptam cety arthaḥ. Ātma-bhavaḥ, avyaktam asphutam, he nārada. Tva tvaṁ pṛcchāmi. Ātma-bhavaḥ avyaktaṁ brahma tasya ātmano dehodbhutams tam.(?) "So because you are directly from Brahmā, therefore I am asking you, what is this?" Sa vai bhavān veda samasta-guhyam upāsito yat puruṣaḥ purāṇaḥ. Puruṣaḥ purāṇaḥ. Puruṣa, the puruṣa... God is puruṣa. God is never female. This is another rascaldom. There are many rascals who think that God is female. "Kālī, Goddess Kālī is God." Goddess Kālī, how can be God? She is śakti. Śakti. Every Vedic scripture it is said that parasya brahmaṇaḥ śaktiḥ. Everything is energy. So how God can be... That is the impersonalist. He can think of God, imagine, imagine. It is imagination. The Māyāvādī theory is that God..., there is no God. The impersonal, there is voidness. You can imagine any form. That's all. Sādhakānāṁ hitārthāya brahmaṇo rūpaḥ kalpanaḥ.(?) Kalpanaḥ means imagination.
Now, in other words, Vyāsadeva agrees or accepts that he knows Brahman, the Absolute Truth, but he does not know the Absolute Truth's ultimate feature, the Personality of Godhead. That he admits. Absolute Truth in the beginning is impersonal. Just like the example, the sun. The sun, the first experience of sun is the sunshine. Every one of us has got the experience how sunshine is overcast all over the universe. It comes within your room, in your apartment, or when you come out you see sunshine, everything. So just like in the night there is no sunshine, but in the morning, as soon as there is sunshine, you experience what is sunshine. Similarly, at a certain stage of our life we may understand what is Brahman. Brahman is compared with the sunshine, light. Sunshine is light, and Brahman is light. How? Light, what is the difference between light and darkness? Light, the difference of light and darkness is... Just like at the present moment it is darkness. We cannot see things rightly. Although we have got very lightening arrangement, artificial electricity, still, we do not see things as they are. Suppose you go up to your roof, and if you want to see, find out some friend's house, you cannot see. This is darkness. Darkness means you do not understand things as it is. But in the sunlight you can see everything.
Enjoyment is the goal of everyone's life. But the difference is that the materialist is trying to hanker after flickering enjoyment, and the transcendentalists, they are hankering after the spiritual enjoyment, or eternal enjoyment. Enjoyment... Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). Because enjoyment is our life. We cannot be void. That is not possible. Therefore the impersonalists, about impersonalists, this Bhāgavata version is that although they rise up almost to the spiritual platform, but because they cannot enjoy... Impersonalists means there is no enjoyment. There is simply light, a life of knowledge. But simply knowledge will not make me happy. I must enjoyment. I must have enjoyment. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12), because my nature is to enjoy. That enjoyment cannot be done in the impersonal or void philosophy. That is not possible. Therefore Bhāgavata says, ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ: "If somebody thinks that he has become liberated after undergoing the process of impersonal philosophy and austerities and penances..." The impersonalists, they also practice severe penances to attain to that Brahman stage. That is also nice thing. But they cannot stay there, because there is no enjoyment.
You can go on hearing saṅkīrtana from such professional men for millions of years; still, you will remain where you are, not rajas-tamopahā. You cannot get out of the bondage of... Therefore you have to hear from the saṅkīrtyamānaṁ munibhir mahātmabhiḥ. Mahātmā. Mahātmā means mahātmānas tu māṁ pārtha daivīṁ prakṛtim āśritāḥ, bhajanty ananya-manasaḥ (BG 9.13). Mahātmā means those who have finished this material business. Simply they're interested with Kṛṣṇa and... Just like Haridāsa Ṭhākura or followers, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's followers. If you hear... Just like Nārada Muni. In his previous birth he heard from these mahātmās, great devotees, only for four months. It is stated here. The time is... śarat prāvṛṣa, prāvṛṣa, prāvṛṣikāv ṛtū. Śarat and autumn, two ṛtūs, he heard. The association was there. And the result was: viśṛṇvato me 'nusavaṁ yaśo 'malam. Kṛṣṇa's glorification, amalam, without any spot, without any... Kṛṣṇa's glories, that is real nirguṇa. Nirguṇa does not mean to become impersonal. Nirguṇa means without any material attributes. So when Kṛṣṇa's glories are chanted, that is not anything of this material world.
Therefore Vaiṣṇava never accepts sāyujya-mukti, to become one with the Supreme. Because Vaiṣṇava knows that impersonal advancement is risky. They know it perfectly. Therefore a Vaiṣṇava never... Vaiṣṇava is not anxious for any kind of mukti. Dīyamānaṁ na gṛhṇanti. They don't want... Especially Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas, they don't want mukti. They are happy wherever they are existing. If they get the chance of chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, that is perfection of life. They don't want anything more. Just like Haridāsa Ṭhākura. We should not imitate, but the position is like that. Just like Prahlāda Mahārāja. He was not at all afraid of this material world. He was very cautious. A spiritualist, a devotee, a Kṛṣṇa conscious person, should be very cautious. But not afraid to meet any dangerous position. But must be cautious. Cautious in this way, that he may not fall down again under the clutches of māyā. This should be, care should be taken.
So this saṁhitā... Saṁhitā means Vedic literature. There are many rascals, they say that "Bhāgavata was not written by Vyāsadeva, it was written by some Bopadeva." They say like that. Māyāvādīs, the Nirīśvaravādī. Because although Nirīśvaravādī, or Māyāvādī leader Śaṅkarācārya, he wrote comments on Bhagavad-gītā, but he could not touch Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, because in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam the things are so nicely set up, kṛtvānukramya, that it is not possible by the Māyāvādīs to prove that God is impersonal. They cannot do it. Nowadays they are doing, reading Bhāgavatam in their own way, but that does not appeal to any sane man. Sometimes I have seen a big Māyāvādī is explaining one verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that "Because you are God, therefore if you are pleased, then God is pleased." This is their philosophy. "You do not require to please God separately.
Here in this material world the varieties are of material external energy, bahiraṅga. Bahiraṅga-śakti. There are three manifestations of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). That is the Vedic injunction, that the Lord's energy is manifested in varieties—not impersonal. If we study very intelligently, then we can understand how Kṛṣṇa's energy is working in varieties. You study even one flower, you'll see how varieties of color and arrangement of the petals, everything. Don't think as the rascals, they say "nature." What is nature? Nature is an instrument, just like typewriter . You're typewriting... You are typewriting, not that the typewriter typewriting. That is a mistake. Those who have less intelligence, poor fund of knowledge, they see that the typewriter is working. No. The typewriter means the person who is using the machine, he is just like this microphone. Microphone is not talking; I am talking. It is an instrument. Similarly, what we call nature, that is an instrument only, not that nature is working. Nature is dull. What is this microphone? It is made of dull matter. It cannot work.
You have to approach such guru. And who is that guru? Vaiṣṇava. Not any ordinary person. Therefore anyone who is not Vaiṣṇava, you should not approach. It is false knowledge. Its knowledge has no value. Sanātana Gosvāmī has strictly forbidden: avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇaṁ pūtaṁ hari-kathāmṛtam, śravaṇaṁ naiva kartavyam. Don't hear. You'll be spoiled. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). If you hear from a Māyāvādī impersonalist, then your spiritual progress is doomed, finished. No more spiritual progress. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile. Māyāvādī haya kṛṣṇe aparādhī. The Māyāvādīs, they are offenders to Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Person, and the Māyāvādī wants to make Him imperson; therefore they are offenders.
So the Māyāvādī will always try to explain in the impersonal way. Therefore they're offender. Kṛṣṇa personally presents. Why Kṛṣṇa comes? So that the misunderstanding whether the Absolute Truth, God, is a person or imperson, to mitigate this trouble, this misunderstanding, He comes as person. He presents Himself, "Here is I am. I am person. Why do you make Me imperson?" He's person. Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati (BG 4.7). Why you are taking so much trouble? Avyaktāsakta-cetasām. Kleśaḥ adhikataras teṣām. Simply you are taking unnecessary trouble. Kleśaḥ adhikataraḥ. And if you take to bhakti, directly personal... And you cannot understand God or Kṛṣṇa by any other means except bhakti. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ (BG 18.55). If you want to know Absolute Truth, God, then you have to take to bhakti. And what does it mean bhakti? Bhakti means there must be Bhagavān. Otherwise, what is the meaning of bhakti? If I want... Bhakti means to render service. So if the master is not there, then where is the question of bhakti and service? It is all bogus. Bhakti means three things: bhakta, Bhagavān, and the service. That is bhakti. They're individual. Bhagavān is individual, bhakta is individual, and the reciprocation of dealings between two individuals, it is called bhakti. That is bhakti.
So we should accept, mataṁ ca vāsudevasya. We should accept the instruction given by Vāsudeva and the śāstra, sādhu. Sādhu, śāstra, guru, they'll speak the same thing. Guru means who speaks on the basis of śāstra; otherwise he's not guru. And śāstra means the opinion of the great authorities. Just like Vyāsadeva, Parāśara Muni, Nārada Muni, modern ācāryas. We do not neglect. We may differ from the philosophical point of view—just like Buddha, Śaṅkarācārya. Vaiṣṇavas, they do not accept the philosophy of Buddha or Śaṅkarācārya. Buddha's philosophy: zero, śūnyavādi; and Śaṅkara's philosophy: nirviśeṣa-vādi, impersonal. So we defy these, nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi. But we have got all respect for them. Don't think that we disrespect. Keśava dhṛta-buddha-śarīra jaya jagadīśa hare. And the Vaiṣṇavas know Śaṅkarācārya. Śaṅkara, svayaṁ śaṅkara, he is incarnation of Lord Śiva, and Lord Buddha is incarnation of Kṛṣṇa. So they come for particular purpose, to benefit the whole world. But that is for the time being. That is not permanent. The permanent solution is mataṁ ca vāsudevasya. That is permanent. Mataṁ ca vāsudevasya. That is permanent.
So in the beginning Kuntīdevī said that namasye puruṣaṁ tvādyam īśvaraṁ prakṛteḥ param: (SB 1.8.18) "I offer my obeisances unto the person, puruṣam, who is prakṛteḥ param, who is beyond this material manifestation." Kṛṣṇa is complete spirit soul, Supersoul. He has no material body. So in the beginning Kuntīdevī gave us this understanding that God, the supreme puruṣa... Puruṣa means person. He's not imperson. Puruṣa. But He's not a puruṣa of this material world, not a personality of this material creation. That is to be understood. The impersonalists cannot accommodate in their poor fund of knowledge how the Supreme Absolute Truth can become a person, because whenever they think of person they think of a person of this material world. That is their defect. So they have poor fund of knowledge. Why God should be a person of this material world? So that was cleared in the beginning. Prakṛteḥ param, beyond this material creation, but He is a person.
So if you simply think only one verse, as it is explained here, and the paṅkaja, lotus, in reference with Kṛṣṇa's body, you can meditate the whole life how Kṛṣṇa is beautiful, how Kṛṣṇa is wise, how Kṛṣṇa's creation, how... This is meditation. Thinking of Kṛṣṇa. Dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā paśyanti yaṁ yoginaḥ (SB 12.13.1). Yoginaḥ means... Yogi means he's always thinking of Kṛṣṇa. Mat-paraḥ. That is yogi. These rascals are not yogi, thinking something impersonal and being harassed. Kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). They are simply, they are simply laboring, adhikataraḥ, more and more. They cannot get anything substantial. Therefore after meditation: "Come on, give me cigarette. Come on. My throat is now dried up. Give me cigarette." That is not meditation. Meditation means, this is: namaḥ paṅkaja-netrāya.
The same example as I have repeated many times. Just like we see sometimes the hills from our room. Here there are many hills in Los Angeles. But they are not distinct. When you are seeing the hills from a distant place, it looks like something cloudy. But if you go still further towards the hill, you'll distinctly find that there is something, hill. And if you come to the hill, then you'll find so many persons are working there, so many houses are there. There are streets, motorcars, everything, all varieties. So similarly, when one wants to know the Absolute Truth by his teeny brain, "I shall make research to find out the Absolute Truth," then you'll have vague idea, impersonal idea. And if you become a meditator, then you will find that God is situated within your heart. Dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā paśyanti yaṁ yoginaḥ (SB 12.13.1). The yogis, the real yogis, they, by meditation, they see viṣṇu-mūrti within the heart. And those who are devotees, they meet the Supreme Person face to face just like we are meeting face to face, talk face to face, serve directly. The Supreme Personality of Godhead orders that: "You supply me this," and he supplies. That is the difference.
The Māyāvādī philosophy is like that. It is called anthropomorphism. They say that: "Because the... The Absolute Truth is imperson, but because we are persons, we imagine that Absolute Truth also person." Just the opposite. Actually that is not the fact. We have got this personal form as reflection of God. So in the reflection, if the original person is benefited, the reflection is also benefited. That is the philosophy. The reflection is also benefited.
So Brahman realization without activity of Brahman will not allow you to stay in the Brahman position. You'll fall down. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Patanty adhaḥ. By great austerities and penance, they can rise up to the paraṁ padam, ahaṁ brahmāsmi, brahma-pada. But āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ, from that place, patanty adhaḥ, again falls down in this material world. Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ: "Because they did not learn how to honor Your lotus feet." Because they are impersonalists, they are—"God, or the Brahman, has no leg." So how they will take shelter of the leg or lotus feet? Impersonal. Therefore the very word is used, anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Aṅghrayaḥ means this leg, or lotus feet. So because they have no information, or they, even they have got information, they are not inclined to render service, therefore they fall down. This is the position.
That is a concession to the devotee." Therefore, Kuntīdevī says, apare: "Others say like that." Somebody says like this; somebody says like that; somebody says like this. This is going on. But actually, Kṛṣṇa remains aja always. Because if we do not understand that Kṛṣṇa, what is Kṛṣṇa, then we'll misunderstand Him, that "He is also born. He is also born, so how He can become?" The Māyāvādīs say that "Kṛṣṇa is also having a body of the material body, māyā. Therefore real spiritual identity (is) impersonal. As soon as He assumes the body, it is material." That is called Māyāvāda. "Māyā. The Kṛṣṇa's body is māyā. The ultimate Absolute is no body, impersonal." That is their theory. Therefore we call them Māyāvādī.
But they do not actually know that ultimately the Absolute Truth is a person, the Supreme Person, Bhagavān. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate. Vadanti tat tattva-vidas, tattva-vidaḥ (SB 1.2.11). Tattva means one who knows tattva. They know that ultimately the Absolute Truth is person, not imperson. Therefore Bhāgavata says, vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvam (SB 1.2.11). What is the Absolute Truth? Absolute Truth means tattvam. So Bhāgavata says, vadanti tat tattva-vidaḥ: "Those who are aware of the Absolute Truth, they say like this." What is that? Brahmeti... Yad, yaj jñānam advayam. Advayam: "He is without any duality, but the Absolute Truth is known as in three features: by somebody as Brahman, by somebody as Paramātmā, and somebody as Bhagavān."
So when the energy is withdrawn or Kṛṣṇa is not there, the energy... Kṛṣṇa's energy and Kṛṣṇa is no difference. Śakti-śaktimator abhedaḥ. Just like the sun. The sun is the śaktimān, energetic, and the sunshine is the energy. So, so long the sunshine is there, the sun is there. There is no difficulty. When the sun is not there, the sun's energy's also not there. Similarly Kṛṣṇa, so long Kṛṣṇa is within us, within this body... Kṛṣṇa's energy... There are... Two things are always. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept the energy. Simply they accept the energetic impersonal. No. We must accept the energy and the energetic, both. Śakti-pariṇāma. Śakti, śakti means energy. By the energy everything is going on. The energetic is aloof. Just like the sun, we can very easily understand. The example is just before us. The sun is there, the sunshine is there, and within the sun-globe there is the sun-god. But we, so-called scientists, we are studying the sun from ninety-three millions of miles away, and we are taking very pride that we are studying the sun. If you have studied sun, why don't you go there? Go there, and enter into the sun planet. This is a material thing. And what to speak of the spiritual thing?
So if you make research, that is intelligent research. Then you'll find, "Here is the electric powerhouse." Similarly, if you further study, that who is running on this powerhouse, you'll find a human being. He's not impersonal; he's person. The electricity is impersonal. Even the powerhouse is also imperson. But the man behind the everything, that is a person. Therefore God is person. Logical conclusion. How He can be imperson? Imperson has no brain. The... Just like so many machines now we have invented, very wonderful machines. But the machine is not the brain. The operator is the brain. Why do they not understand? Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram: (BG 9.10) "You are seeing the energy or the wonderful action and reaction of this material cosmic manifestation. But don't think that they are working independently. No. I am behind there." So what is the difficulty to understand? Or from example you can understand how things can go on nicely without a nice brain behind these things? It is conclusion. Mayādhyakṣeṇa. And Kṛṣṇa says further, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4). Avyakta, avyakta is also mūrti, a form. Just like the sky. The sky is avyakta, not manifest, but it has also a form, a round form, the universe. Without form there is nothing. Everything has form. The so-called impersonal, that is also form. Just like you go to the ocean, you will find a form, a big circle. That is also form. How you can say there is no form?
So the Māyāvādīs, they simply see the effulgence, something impersonal, effulgence. They cannot see anything more. Just like the sunshine. In the sunshine, there are so many things. Suppose in bright sunshine, you saw one airplane is gone up, but after some time you cannot see. You cannot see. You cannot see because due to the dazzling sunshine, although the airplane is there you cannot see. Similarly, simply if we try to see the effulgence, brahma-jyotir, we are unable to see inside. The Īśopaniṣad, there is this statement that a devotee is praying to the Lord that "You wind up Your, this effulgence so that I can see You properly." So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot see the personal activities or the planets where Kṛṣṇa is personally active. That they cannot see. Therefore Bhāgavata says anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they neglected to see the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, therefore, despite their severe penances and austerities, on account of not seeing the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, they come back again to this material world. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32).
We all living beings in different forms, 8,400,000 forms. We are all living beings. And Kṛṣṇa is also a living being. Kṛṣṇa is not impersonal. God is not impersonal. Just like we are persons, you are person, every one of us sitting here, we have got person, personality. We have got individuality. So the impersonalists, they cannot adjust that we are individual persons and how the Supreme, the original cause of everything, He also can be person. Because we have our experience that my knowledge or any individual persons knowledge, opulence, they're limited. But how the unlimited can be person? Because we are limited and God is unlimited, therefore these Māyāvādīs, with poor fund of knowledge, that, because we being persons, we are limited, therefore God, being unlimited, He must be imperson. He must be. They compare the material things. Just like the sky. We think it unlimited. The sky is impersonal. So their philosophy is because God is unlimited, therefore he must be impersonal.
So here Kuntīdevī says that "Please help me in cutting my affection with my family." Sneha-pāśam imaṁ chindhi: "Please cut off. Please help me cutting this family connection." Then Kuntī says that tvayi me ananya-viṣayā matir madhu-pate asakṛt. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means to cut off family connection and enter into Kṛṣṇa's family, not void. We are not impersonalists or voidists. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are impersonalists. They think, "Kṛṣṇa is person. Kṛṣṇa's activities are all personal. So this is also māyā." Because they are Nirviśeṣavādī, their ultimate goal is nirviśeṣa-brahman. So anything personal, they cannot accept it. And the Buddhist philosophy is to zero, śūnyavādi. Nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi. The whole world is now corrupted with these two kinds of philosophies: nirviśeṣa-śūnyavāda, impersonalism and voidism. But Vaiṣṇava philosophy is not voidism, not impersonalism. Vaiṣṇava philosophy means to know the Absolute Truth as person. Impersonal realization of the Absolute Truth is partial knowledge. It is not complete, because the Absolute Truth is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1). Vigraha means form. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate.
Therefore intelligent men, they should inquire, "Where we shall enter in family life and we can eternally enjoy?" That is Kṛṣṇa's family. You enter into Kṛṣṇa's family, Vṛndāvana family, where Kṛṣṇa has got His father, mother, His friends, His lover, His beloved, His cows, His garden, His Yamunā. You enter that, that family. Then yad gatvā na nivartante (BG 15.6). Then you will not have to return back again to this temporary family, which will not stay. But if you enter Kṛṣṇa's family... Therefore Kṛṣṇa comes. Kṛṣṇa is so kind that—you are so much family, fond of family life—"Just here see. I have got My family. I am not impersonal. I have got My family. I have got My father. I have got My mother. I have got My friend. I have got My beloved, Rādhārāṇī, and the gopīs. Everything I have got. You can enter also. Come. Why you are rotting here?" That is Kṛṣṇa's mission.
The conception of one world state can only be fulfilled if we can follow the infallible authority. An imperfect human being cannot create an ideology acceptable to everyone. Only the perfect and the infallible can create a program which is applicable at every place and can be followed by all in the world. It is the person who rules, and not the impersonal government. If the person is perfect, the government is perfect. If the person is a fool, the government is a fool's paradise. That is the law of nature. There are so many stories of imperfect kings or executive heads. Therefore, the executive head must be a trained person like Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, and he must have the full autocratic power to rule over the world. The conception of a world state can take shape only under the regime of a perfect king like Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira. The world was happy in those days because there were kings like Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira to rule over the world." Let this king follow Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira and show an example of how monarchy can make a perfect state. There is instruction in the śāstras, and if he follows, he can do that. He has got the power.
So Brahman must be without variety." This is also material conception, because he is thinking like that. But my thinking, if I am in māyā, so whatever I am thinking, that is also māyā. But these rascals they do not understand that. They do not understand that. I am thinking that "Brahman must be opposite of this variety. Therefore Brahman must be impersonal." But what is their conclusion? The conclusion... He is thinking. He is thinking like that. But real Brahman, Para-brahman, Kṛṣṇa, is not impersonal. He does not say that "I am impersonal." But these rascals say that "God is impersonal." So this kind of thinking by the person who is in māyā, that is also māyā. Therefore they are called Māyāvādī. Māyāvādī means all their philosophy is also māyā. It has no meaning. Therefore they are Māyāvādī. They are handling something in the māyā. Therefore they are called Māyāvādī.
So there is nothing wrong. Even if we become an animal of Kṛṣṇa, that is also very worthy. That is not ordinary thing. Kṛṣṇa is embracing. Kṛṣṇa... You see the picture. Kṛṣṇa is embracing. Surabhīr abhipālayantam. Cintāmaṇi-prakara-sadmasu kalpa-vṛkṣa-lakṣāvṛteṣu surabhīr abhipālayantam (Bs. 5.29). Kṛṣṇa always tends the cows. His name is cowherd boy. To become animal of Kṛṣṇa is a great, great fortune. It is not ordinary thing. Any associate of Kṛṣṇa, either His cowherd boyfriends or calf or cows, or the Vṛndāvana trees, plants, flowers or water, they are all devotees of Kṛṣṇa. They like to serve Kṛṣṇa in different capacities. Somebody is serving Kṛṣṇa as animal. Somebody is serving Kṛṣṇa as fruits and flowers, as tree, as Yamunā water, or the beautiful cowherds men and damsels or Kṛṣṇa's father and mother, so many with Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is not imperson. So He has got so many lovers. Kṛṣṇa also loves them. So Kṛṣṇa's another name is paśu-pāla, paśu-pāla-paṅkaja. He is, mean, tender of the animals. Surabhīr abhipālayantam (Bs. 5.29). He takes pleasure in tending the cows, surabhī. These are surabhī cows, not these ordinary cows, surabhī cows. Surabhī cows means you can milk the cow as many times as you like and as much milk as you like. That is surabhī.
So therefore the Māyāvādīs, they think that "Make me zero, void. Then there will be no pains and pleasure, no embarrassment." Their philosophy is like that. Impersonal, that is also the same thing. Or void. Voidism, the same thing. "Make it zero." Just like the foolish man, when one is embarrassed, he commits suicide. He commits suicide. He thinks, "If I end this body, then my embarrassment will be finished." So these are the circumstances. Why? Now, apaśyatām ātma-tattvam (SB 2.1.2). He does not know "What is the necessity of me, soul, how to get me relieved from that." That he does not know. So therefore this word is used: apaśyatām ātma-tattvam (SB 2.1.2). He does not see that "I am spirit soul. My necessity is different from the bodily necessity." (break) "Then I'll become comfortable." Even one knows that "I am not this body," but the body is home... Or I know that "I am not this room," but I am engaged always how to keep this room very neat and clean. That is my business. I do not know that there is another business. Apaśyatām ātma-tattvam (SB 2.1.2). That is the defect.
That is called liberty, mukti. That is required. So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do no know that "Suppose, even I get free, so where shall I go?" He thinks, "I shall be free in the sky." Just like impersonalism. Sky is impersonal. So if suppose a bird is given freedom, but he flies in the sky, will he be happy? No. That also he'll not be happy. Then he'll again think of that "It was better to remain in the cage. Now what is the value of my, this freedom? I'm not happy." And again go back to the cage. You will see in India. There is a bird, fiftil.(?) Fiftil. The man who keeps that bird in the cage, sometimes he takes it to the open field, and he opens the door, opens the door, and the bird walks, sometimes flies. He is given freedom. Then again the man: (makes coaxing sound:) ts-ts-ts-ts. He says like that, and the bird comes again within the cage. You'll see. If you have seen, those who are Indian. But he thinks that "I have been given freedom now. But where shall I go? Where shall I go? I have to eat." So he again comes back: "Better to live within this cage. Better to live within this cage."
So therefore you have to go back to home, back to Kṛṣṇa, where there is everything variety, spiritual varieties. You can play with Kṛṣṇa. You can dance with Kṛṣṇa. You can talk with Kṛṣṇa. You can fight with Kṛṣṇa. That is also... Cowherd boys, they fight. They enjoy. That is also enjoyment. Everything enjoyment. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is trying to give information to the rascals who are mentioned as apaśyatām ātma-tattvam (SB 2.1.2), one who does not know what is the nature of ātmā, what does he want, how he'll be happy. That is... They are called apaśyatām ātma-tattvam (SB 2.1.2). They have no information. Therefore gṛheṣu gṛha-medhinām. They are trying to be happy here within the cage. That's all. That is not possible. So without knowing this Kṛṣṇa conscious philosophy, within the cage and without the cage, they are unhappy. Is it clear? Their imagination of liberty without the cage, that is also unhappiness. Because he does not know where to go. Therefore after remaining for some time in that impersonal stage, again he comes back to the cage. So this kind of going and coming will not help him. Tyāga and bhoga.
We are also claimed as sons of God. Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya sambhavanti mūrtayo yāḥ (BG 14.4). There are 8,400,000 species of life, and they have got forms. They are sons of God. So where is our experience that a son who has got a form, his father is impersonal, no form? Where you have got this experience? If the son has got form and the father is formless, how it can be? What is the reason? Where is the argument? But they are concluding like that. I am the son of my father, so my father has got a form. I have got a form. His father has got form. His father has got form. Even if we do not see the tenth generation, up to, whether it was form or formless, but it is supposed that he must have a form. So similarly, if you ultimately go to the supreme father, then how it is formless? No. Formless is not the actual realization of God. That is the beginning. That may be beginning. To realize the energy of God, that is formless. Just like the sun. The sunshine is formless, but the sun globe is not formless, or the person, the predominating Deity within the sunglobe, he is not formless. The sunshine is formless. So this formless realization... Just like the sun. Sun is also light. Sun is also heat. The sunshine is also light, sunshine is also heat. But this heat and light, energy of the sun, they are not actually the sun. It is only the energy.
Prabhupāda: So next, another verse you can read.
Pradyumna: Āyuṣ-kāmo 'śvinau devau ... (devotees repeat) puṣṭi-kāma ilāṁ yajet... One who desires to be absorbed in the impersonal brahma-jyotir effulgence should worship the master of the Vedas (Lord Brahmā or Bṛhaspati, the learned priest), one who desires powerful sex should worship the heavenly King, Indra, and one who desires good progeny should worship the great progenitors called the Prajāpatis. One who desires good fortune should worship Durgādevī, the superintendent of the material world. One desiring to be very powerful should worship fire, and one who aspires only after money should worship the Vasus. One should worship the Rudra incarnations of Lord Śiva if he wants to be a great hero. One who wants a large stock of grains should worship Aditi. One who desires to attain the heavenly planets should worship the sons of Aditi. One who desires a worldly kingdom should worship Viśvadeva, and one who wants to be popular with the general mass of population should worship the Sādhya demigod. One who desires a long span of life should worship the demigods known as the Aśvinī-kumāras, and a person desiring a strongly built body should worship the earth. One who desires stability in his post should worship the horizon and the earth combined. One who desires to be beautiful should worship the beautiful residents of the Gandharva planet, and one who desires a good wife should worship the Apsarās and the Urvaśī society girls of the heavenly kingdom. One who desires domination over others should worship Lord Brahmā, the head of the universe. One who desires tangible fame should worship the Personality of Godhead, and one who desires a good bank balance should worship the demigod Varuṇa. If one desires to be a greatly learned man he should worship Lord Śiva, and if one desires a good marital relation he should worship the chaste goddess Umā, the wife of Lord Śiva.
Purport: There are different modes of worship for different persons desiring success in particular subjects. The conditioned soul living within the purview of the material world cannot be an expert in every type of materially enjoyable asset, but one can have considerable influence over a particular matter by worshiping a particular demigod, as mentioned above. Rāvaṇa was made a very powerful man by worshiping Lord Śiva, and he used to offer severed heads to please Lord Śiva. He became so powerful by the grace of Lord Śiva that all the demigods were afraid of him, until he at last challenged the Personality of Godhead Śrī Rāmacandra and thus ruined himself. In other words, all such persons who aspire after gaining some or all of the material objects of enjoyment, or the gross materialistic persons, are on the whole less intelligent, as confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.20). It is said there that those who are bereft of all good sense, or those whose intelligence is withdrawn by the deluding energy of māyā, aspire to achieve all sorts of material enjoyment in life by pleasing the various demigods, or by advancing in material civilization under the heading of scientific progress. The real problem of life in the material world is to solve the question of birth, death, old age and disease. No one wants to change his birthright, no one wants to meet death, no one wants to be old or invalid, and no one wants diseases. But these problems are solved neither by the grace of any demigod nor by the so-called advancement of material science.
Prabhupāda: Hm.
Pradyumna: "The path of religion entails making progress on the path of spiritual advancement, ultimately reviving the eternal relation with Lord Viṣṇu in His impersonal effulgence, localized Paramātmā feature, and ultimately in His personal feature by spiritual advancement of knowledge. And one who wants to establish a good dynasty and be happy in the progress of temporary bodily relations should take shelter of the pitās and the demigods in other pious planets. Such different classes of worshipers of different demigods may ultimately reach the respective planets within the universe, but he who reaches the spiritual planets in the brahma-jyotir achieves the highest perfection."
Prabhupāda: Yes. So, now. (devotees chant japa) (break in tape)... the word is abhyantaram, the word is abhyantaram... Antara means internal. (break in tape)
Then where is the question of happiness? The karmīs cannot have happiness, because their method is to work hard. How they can be happy? Similarly, jñānīs, mokṣa-kāmaḥ. After being disgusted that "I worked so hard throughout my whole life. I could not get peace. Therefore it is false." Jagan mithyā. Mithyā means false. This is Śaṅkarācārya philosophy. Jagan mithyā. Mithyā means false. Brahma satyam. "Now let me search out where is Brahma and become one with him." That is also another labor. Speculating. They have to interpret all these Vedic literature to make God dead, void, impersonal, nullified. So they have to gather their arguments. That is another labor, hard labor. So they are also working hard. Yogis, they want to show some magic: "I can walk on the water. I can fly in the air without any airship. I can go this planet, that planet." Yogis can do that. They have got this magical power. "I can create immediately gold." And if you can show these magical feats, immediately you get so many...
Pradyumna: No, we didn't read the last one. "Purport. The Supreme Personality of Godhead Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa is described in the Bhagavad-gītā as the Puruṣottama, or the Supreme Personality. It is He only who can award liberation to the impersonalists by absorbing such aspirants in the brahma-jyotir, the bodily rays of the Lord. The brahma-jyotir is not separate from the Lord, as the glowing sun ray is not independent of the sun disc. Therefore one who desires to merge into the supreme impersonal brahma-jyotir must also worship the Lord by bhakti-yoga, as recommended here in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Bhakti-yoga is especially stressed here as the means of all perfection. In the previous chapters it has been stated that bhakti-yoga is the ultimate goal of both karma-yoga and jñāna-yoga, and in the same way in this chapter it is emphatically declared that bhakti-yoga is the ultimate goal of the different varieties of worship of the different demigods. Bhakti-yoga, thus being the supreme means of self-realization, is recommended here. Everyone must therefore seriously take up the methods of bhakti-yoga, even though one aspires for material enjoyment or liberation from material bondage.
Akāmaḥ is one who has no material desire. A living being, naturally being the part and parcel of the supreme whole puruṣaṁ pūrṇam, has as his natural function to serve the Supreme Being, just as the parts and parcels of the body, or the limbs of the body, are naturally meant to serve the complete body. Desireless means, therefore, not to be inert like the stone, but to be conscious of one's actual position and thus desire satisfaction only from the Supreme Lord. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has explained this desirelessness as bhajanīya parama-puruṣa-sukha-mātra-sva-sukhatvam in his Sandarbha. This means that one should feel happy only by experiencing the happiness of the Supreme Lord. This intuition of the living being is sometimes manifested even during the conditioned stage of a living being in the material world, and such intuition is expressed in the manner of altruism, philanthropy, socialism, communism, etc., by the undeveloped minds of less intelligent persons.
In the mundane field such an outlook of doing good to others in the form of society, community, family, country, or humanity is a partial manifestation of the same original feelings in which a pure living entity feels happiness by the happiness of the Supreme Lord. Such superb feelings were exhibited by the damsels of Vrajabhūmi for the happiness of the Lord. The gopīs loved the Lord without any return, and this is the perfect exhibition of the akāma spirit. Kāma spirit, or the desire for one's own satisfaction, is fully exhibited in the material world, whereas the spirit of akāma is fully exhibited in the spiritual world.
Thoughts of becoming one with the Lord, or being merged in the brahma-jyotir, can also be exhibitions of kāma spirit if they are desires for one's own satisfaction to be free from the material miseries. A pure devotee does not want liberation..."
Prabhupāda: Prahlāda Mahārāja said that "I don't want my liberation alone. Unless I deliver all these fools who are rotting in this material world, I do not want my personal liberation." This is Vaiṣṇava philosophy. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are going to Himalayas or some secluded place for personal benefit. But a Vaiṣṇava, he has no desire for personal benefit. The personal benefit is already there in Vaiṣṇava because he's in touch with the Supreme Lord by his service. Prahlāda Mahārāja said,
- naivodvije para duratyaya-vaitaraṇyās
- tvad-vīrya-gāyana-mahāmṛta-magna-cittaḥ
- śoce tato vimukha-cetasa indriyārtha-
- māyā-sukhāya bharam udvahato vimūḍhān
- (SB 7.9.43)
"My dear Lord, I am not anxious for myself. Because I have got the thing. I have no problem how to cross over the nescience or how to go to Vaikuṇṭha or to become liberated. These problems are solved." Why? How you have solved? Now, tvad-vīrya-gāyana-mahāmṛta-magna-cittaḥ. "Because I am engaged always in glorifying your activities, so my problem is solved."
Pradyumna: As we have already quoted above from the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu of Rūpa Gosvāmī, even mundane things, if dovetailed in the service of the Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, are accepted as transcendental. For example, the epics or the histories of Rāmāyaṇa and Mahābhārata, which are specifically recommended for the less intelligent classes (women, śūdras and unworthy sons of the higher castes), are also accepted as Vedic literature because they are compiled in connection with the activities of the Lord. Mahābhārata is accepted as the fifth division of the Vedas after its first four divisions, namely Sāma, Yajur, Ṛg and Atharva. The less intelligent do not accept Mahābhārata as part of the Vedas, but great sages and authorities accept it as the fifth division of the Vedas. Bhagavad-gītā is also part of the Mahābhārata, and it is full of the Lord's instruction for the less intelligent class of men. Some less intelligent men say that Bhagavad-gītā is not meant for householders, but such foolish men forget that Bhagavad-gītā was explained to Arjuna, a gṛhastha (family man), and spoken by the Lord in His role as a gṛhastha. So Bhagavad-gītā, although containing the high philosophy of the Vedic wisdom, is for the beginners in the transcendental science, and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is for graduates and postgraduates in the transcendental science. Therefore literatures like Mahābhārata, the, purāṇas and similar other literatures which are full of the pastimes of the Lord, are all transcendental literatures, and they should be discussed with full confidence in the society of great devotees.
The difficulty is that such literatures, when discussed by professional men, appear to be mundane literature like histories or epics because there are so many historical facts and figures. It is said here, therefore, that such literatures should be discussed in the assembly of devotees. Unless they are discussed by devotees, such literatures cannot be relished by the higher class of men. So the conclusion is that the Lord is not impersonal in the ultimate issue. He is the Supreme Person, and He has His different activities. He is the leader of all living entities, and He descends at His will and by His personal energy to reclaim the fallen souls. Thus He plays exactly like the social, political or religious leaders. Because such roles ultimately culminate in the discussion of topics of the Lord, all such preliminary topics are also transcendental. That is the way of spiritualizing the civic activities of human society. Men have inclinations for studying history and many other mundane literatures—stories, fiction, dramas, magazines, newspapers, etc.—so let them be dovetailed with the transcendental service of the Lord, and all of them will turn to the topics relished by all devotees. The propaganda that the Lord is impersonal, that He has no activity and that He is a dumb stone without any name and form has encouraged people to become godless, faithless demons, and the more they deviate from the transcendental activities of the Lord, the more they become accustomed to mundane activities that only clear their path to hell instead of return them home, back to Godhead.* Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam begins from the history of the Pāṇḍavas (with necessary politics and social activities), and yet Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is said to be the Pāramahaṁsa-saṁhitā, or the Vedic literature meant for the topmost transcendentalist, and it describes paraṁ jñānam, the highest transcendental knowledge. Pure devotees of the Lord are all paramahaṁsas, and they are like the swans, who know the art of sucking milk out of a mixture of milk and water.
Prabhupāda: Yes. In our childhood, we saw every village, every town, the transcendental knowledge. Any common man could speak about Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata, Lord Kṛṣṇa. And system was—still there are, but practically closed now—that in the evening, in the village, everyone should assemble in a place to hear messages from Mahābhārata, Rāmāyaṇa, especially, because these two books can be understood by common man. Not... Vedānta philosophy was discussed. So my maternal uncles was in the suburb of Calcutta, about ten miles from our house. So sometimes when we used to go there, so in the evening after taking their meals, by eight o'clock, they would go to a place, assemble, and hear about Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata, Bhāgavata. And they should discuss while coming home, and they should go, they would go to bed thinking that memory. So they'll sleep also Rāmāyaṇa and Mahābhārata. Yes, and dream also Rāmāyaṇa and Mahābhārata. You see? This was the system. Sadā tad-bhāva-bhāvitaḥ (BG 8.6).
Brahman is always greater than anything. If you limit within some limited idea, that is not brahma-jñāna. Brahman is unlimited, the greatest. Bṛhatvān bṛhanatvat(?). So Brahman includes everything—nirākāra, sākāra, and whatever you can speak. But Brahman ultimately is sākāra. It's not nirākāra. That is the verdict of the śāstra.
- vadanti tat tattva-vidas
- tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam
- brahmeti paramātmeti
- bhagavān iti śabdyate
- (SB 1.2.11)
This is brahma-jñāna. Brahman... Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Everything Brahman, but there is division-brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate. Just like the sun. The sunshine is impersonal, but the sun globe is localized and the sun-god is person, but the same sun. Similarly, you have to understand Brahman. When you cannot understand the real nature of Brahman, then it is nirākāra. And when you partially understand, Paramātmā, then localized. And you fully understand, that is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa.
Prabhupāda: So brahma-jijñāsā, spiritual inquiry. So the cat and dog cannot inquire. It is not possible. But when you have got this human form of body, especially born in India and especially born in a Brahman family, if you misuse your life like cats and dogs, that is a great loss.
Indian man (7): Idol worship, impersonal, considered as a stepping stone. Is it fact?
Prabhupāda: I don't follow. What is that?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Is worshiping the idol a stepping stone?"
Indian man (7): Idol worship, mūrti-pūjā, is considered as a stepping stone only. When you attain something, then you need not do.
Prabhupāda: So unless you step one by one, how you can go to the topmost? You have to.
Just like Kṛṣṇa's mother. Motherly affection of Mother Yaśodā upon Kṛṣṇa. And Kṛṣṇa is playing as child, pleasing Mother Yaśodā. So that thing is also in this material world. Here also, the mother likes to raise his beloved child, the child also plays to give pleasure to the mother. The rasa... Rasa means the humor or mellow. Exchange between the mother and child is there and here also. Similarly friendship, similarly conjugal love. Everything, all the five rasas, mellows, are there. The impersonalists cannot understand. They're afraid of... As soon as they hear "love," "Oh, love? Here is love, frustrated. Then it is māyā. Then Kṛṣṇa's love is also māyā." Therefore they are called Māyāvādī. They are carrying this material idea to the spiritual idea. And when they cannot accommodate, they make it zero or impersonal. Śūnyavādi. That is their position. They cannot understand that these very things are existing in the spiritual world in a blissful way. So there is sex, but there is blissful sex. Not that... Here, we want to enjoy sex life, but at the same time want to get out of the result of sex life; therefore we use contraceptive tablets.
So that is the difference between Kṛṣṇa and ordinary living being. Kṛṣṇa remembers everything, knows everything. Vedāhaṁ samatītāni: (BG 7.26) "I know everything." That is Kṛṣṇa. But we do not know. That is the difference. Kṛṣṇa is not impersonal. He's also a person, but He is not a person like us, like you, like me. His personality is supreme. Nobody is greater than Him. Na tasya kāryaṁ karaṇaṁ ca vidyate na tat-samaś cābhyadhikaś ca dṛśyate. These are the Vedic information. He's individual, but He has nothing to do. He's such individual. Just like Kṛṣṇa is here. The whole world is going on under Kṛṣṇa's direction, but He has nothing to do. He's enjoying with Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī. That is Kṛṣṇa's position. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). He has to create one universe or destroy one universe—He hasn't to take any attention. He's engaged in His pleasure—Kṛṣṇa, the reservoir of pleasure. His pleasure is never disturbed by all these activities. He's so perfect. Just like in our society, we are not perfect. Still, you boys and girls, you love me. Whatever I say, immediately done. So if an ordinary person like me, he can do things without his personal endeavor, how far..., how Kṛṣṇa is great, that na tat-samaḥ, there is nobody equal to Him. How great He is, how powerful He is, you can just imagine. If the ordinary person can have some power that he hasn't got to do anything personally—simply by his desire everything is done—so why not Kṛṣṇa also? Where is the difficulty?
Brahman, Brahman does not mean no variety. Varieties. There is fighting. Just like Kṛṣṇa was taking pleasure when His devotee Bhisma was piercing Him with arrows, actually. He was taking pleasure. So Viśvanātha Cakravartī has given this example, that this can be realized by this example, that when a lover kisses the opposite lover, even sometimes, kissing, there is blood come out, still, it is pleasing. In that kissing process, even blood comes out, still, it is pleasure. The lover does not complain. It is very suitable example given by Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura. So when Kṛṣṇa enjoys with His devotees, the fighting with piercing Kṛṣṇa's body, that is being enjoyed by Kṛṣṇa. I think I have explained this in Bhāgavata. So impersonal, without any variety, nobody can live. No live Even Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Lord, He can also say. He wants variety. So this variety of forms... Because they want variety of enjoyment, therefore they have got different forms of body according to the association.
Pradyumna: Purport: "The inhabitants in Vaikuṇṭhaloka are all personalities with spiritual bodily features not to be found in the material world. We can find the descriptions in the revealed scriptures like Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Impersonal descriptions of transcendence in the scriptures indicate that the bodily features in Vaikuṇṭha are never to be seen in any part of the universe. As there are different bodily features in different places of a particular planet, or as there are different bodily features between bodies in different planets, similarly the bodily features of the inhabitants in the Vaikuṇṭhalokas are completely different from those in the material universe. For example, the four hands are distinct from two hands in this world."
Prabhupāda: So in other planets also there are different types of body. Some of the bodies are prominent in earth, earthly body. Just like we have got here earthly body. Similarly, fiery body, watery body, gaseous body, there are different types of body. What the scientists know about? Maybe in Candraloka they are going, but they cannot see the body. They say that there is no life. Suppose there is gaseous body, so they do not see it. But every planet has got different types of body. And Vaikuṇṭha planets also their bodily features are described herein.
So don't take this so-called material civilization has got any value. Reject it. You see? And be prepared for going back to home, back to Godhead. That should be aim. Don't be allured by these rascal leaders. And the another rascal, the Māyāvādī, they cannot believe all these things—"Make it zero." Śūnyavāda. They also do not like the modern ways of life, disgusted, but they have no adjustment, and therefore "Make it impersonal, zero, finished." Here is not zero. Here is substance. We are not after zero. We are after substance. The substance is described here. Just try to understand. We are not fakir. Fakir, this word is used in... One who has no hope, simply loitering in the street, he is a fakir, hopeless. So all are, they are fakirs. And we are not fakir. We are hoping to go there, to live with Nārāyaṇa or Kṛṣṇa, having this greatest opulence, eternal body, blissful life, full of knowledge and opulence. That's all.
Otherwise what is the meaning of king? "God is imperson. God is zero"—what is this nonsense God? If our great conception, king or president, we understand is a great personality, if in this tiny material world in one corner of this planet there is a big president like Nixon and he has got secretary, his staff, his this and that, so many things, and why God should be without any associates, nirākāra, nirviśeṣa, zero? What kind of God? He must be associated with so many associates.
So this is not impersonal, the actual description of the spiritual world, all personal varieties. There are the bees, there are goddess of fortune, and followed by her associate, and there is service and so many things, all opulences, śrī. Śrīr yasya. Aiśvaryasya ṣriyaḥ yaśasaḥ. The definition of the Lord is given that He's full of beauties. In the Brahma-saṁhitā also, Lakṣmī. And not only one, all of them are lakṣmīs. The associates of Lakṣmī, the maidservants of Lakṣmī, they are also lakṣmīs. They are not ordinary women, just like Rādhārāṇī is the chief gopī and all Her young girl friends, they are also gopīs. They are of the same category. Ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhiḥ (Bs. 5.37). They are all expansion of Kṛṣṇa, pleasure potency. So this is the information of the Vaikuṇṭhaloka or Goloka Vṛndāvana. So one should take advantage of this life. What we are gaining here by attachment? What we shall get here? The all rascaldom. There is nothing substantial. Therefore one should little risk, that "If there is some chance of entering such a immortal, eternal kingdom of God, why should I not take chance?" You should take chance at all risk in this life to enter into the nitya-līlā, nitya-līlā, eternal pastimes of the Lord.
Because in Upaniṣad the negating, that negation, negation of the material form... Therefore it is described in an impersonal form. These nonsense are sticking to that impersonal form. Impersonal—there is no form. Really, Veda says, apāni-pāda javano grahitā: "The Supreme Absolute Truth has no legs, has no hands, but He accepts whatever you offer." Now, how He accepts? He has no hand; then how He accepts? But they have no brain. They have no brain. When it is said that "He has no hand," it is said that "He has no hand like you." When he says that "He has no leg," it means that "He has no leg like you." If he has no hand, then how Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati tad aham aśnāmi bhakty-upahṛtam: (BG 9.26) "If I accept them"? If He is far away within the Goloka Vṛndāvana, goloka eva nivasaty akhilātmā (Bs. 5.37), but He has got such a hand-although He is living in Goloka Vṛndāvana, far, far away, He will immediately Whatever you offer, He will take. That kind of hand, not your three feet hand. If somebody offers me downstairs, "Prabhupāda, take this flower," but I am here. How can I take? But He can take. He can take. That is called apāni-pāda javano grahitā paśyaty acakṣuḥ. He can see. His eyes are not like this, that beyond this wall I cannot see anything. He can see everyone, what you are doing nonsense. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. As witness, He is seeing. He is within your heart. How you will hide it? Anumantā upadraṣṭā.
The Upaniṣad also it is stated that He... The two birds are sitting on the same tree, the jīvātmā and paramātmā. The one bird is eating forbidden fruit, and the other bird is seeing. So He is seeing. But how He is seeing? The Veda, the Vedic literatures, apaśyati. Therefore sees. Apaśyati means see. But you said, acakṣuḥ. He has no eyes. How He sees? That is His eyes. He has no eyes like you, a three feet distance, that's all, finished, your eyesight. He can see. From many thousands and millions of miles away He can see. So it is the distinction. When it is stated, impersonalism, He is not a person like us. Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam: (BG 9.11) "Because I come here to be visible to the rascals, instead of taking advantage of this visibility, they are describing, nirākāra. Mūḍhā, rascals. I come here personally and still they say nirākāra, impersonal. Mūḍhā, rascals, fools, asses."
You chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra.' He has ordered Me like that. Because I am a fool, I have no knowledge; therefore he has given Me this engagement, chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. So I am chanting this Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, and I do not know. I become mad after chanting. And I get, I feel transcendental pleasure. And sometimes I act like a madman. So My Guru Mahārāja has said that 'You are very fortunate. You are very fortunate.' " Then Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī very mildly said, "It is all right, You're chanting. What is the wrong if You study Vedānta-sūtra?" Then Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that "Vedānta-sūtra We know, but not like you. We know. If you don't mind, then I can explain Vedānta-sūtra." So He explained Vedānta-sūtra that Brahman, Brahman means "the biggest." So Brahman is ṣaḍ-aiśvarya-pūrṇa, biggest, means He's full of all opulences. That is biggest. He's the richest. He's the wisest. He's the most beautiful. He's most famous. And... In this way He explained that Brahman, the biggest, He cannot be impersonal. He's personal. He gave many instances from Vedic literature. In this way, He convinced that "The way you study Vedānta-sūtra, that is not the proper way. Vedānta-sūtra means to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa."
So there must be some leader. In order to get knowledge, we have to find out some leader. And actually, by our experience, whatever we're doing... Just like we got independence. So there was a leader, Mahatma Gandhi. He led the country. Then you came to your national consciousness, and you combined together, and the Britishers went away. The opinion was against them. So there must be leader. And that leader is a person. That leader cannot be an imperson. No. That is not possible. I think there was a news in the newspaper, Free Press Journal, that the faith in personal God is diminishing. That means they are becoming more foolish. The faith in personal God is diminishing, percentage diminishing. That means people are becoming more and more foolish. That is natural. This is Kali-yuga. Mandāḥ sumanda-matayo manda-bhāgyā hy upadrutāḥ (SB 1.1.10). The more this age of Kali will increase, people will diminish in their bodily strength, in their memory, in their mercifulness, in so many ways. Eight kinds of diminishing, decreasing. Actually, we find, even in Western countries, the present generation, they are not as strong as their father or grandfather. Bodily strength decreasing. Memory is decreasing. There is no mercifulness. Now, at the present moment, if somebody is being killed and you are passing, nobody takes care. "Let him be killed." Because dayā, mercifulness, is diminishing. The duration of life diminishing. The bodily stature diminishing. The memory diminishing. Everything is diminishing.
I have repeatedly said that cure of disease is all right, but after curing, if you are not engaged in your healthy activities, then means, that means that your disease is again, will be relapsed. The śāstra says therefore, āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). One sometimes, after practicing much severe austerities and penances, he can approach the Brahman, paraṁ padam, that is Brahman realization, or Brahmaloka. Patanty adhaḥ. But from there also you will fall down. Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they did not care to worship the lotus feet of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore Māyāvādīs, the impersonalists, they fall down. Because they cannot stay. It is not possible. Simply impersonal effulgence, Brahman effulgence, you cannot stay. You can... That example I have given many times, that you can go very high in the sky by your very powerful sputnik and airship, but if you have no place to stay there, then you'll come back again. You'll come back again. Similarly, you can go to the Brahman effulgence, but within the Brahman effulgence, there are Vaikuṇṭha planets, or the spiritual world, there is Vaikuṇṭha planet. If you have no place to stay in the Vaikuṇṭha planets, then you'll come down again to this material world.
I have given this example that you have got a very nice sputnik, airplane, you can go many thousands and millions miles up. But if you don't get any shelter either in the moon planet or any other planet then you come back again. The same example. Similarly, you may become brahma-bhūtaḥ, Brahman realized, but if you simply remain in the impersonal or void... Brahma-bhūtaḥ means to make this material world null and void and you come to the another world, spiritual world. So if you cannot enter into the spiritual world, mad-bhaktiṁ labhate parām (BG 18.54), if you simply remain brahma-bhūtaḥ, then you will fall down. Because you are by nature seeking ānanda, blissful life. So if you do not get varieties of life... Just like we want varieties in this material world. This material world is simply imitation of the spiritual world. So we are attached to the varieties; therefore we are seeking ānanda. But because it is material and we are spiritual being, we cannot enjoy this ānanda, material varieties fully. There are so many defects, inebrieties, and we are seeking that spiritual variety. So if you don't enter into the spiritual world with spiritual variety then you will again fall down. That is called bhakti-yoga.
Just like we have explained several times that we have got experience of the sunshine. Because sunshine is very easily approached. But that understanding of the sunshine is not real understanding of the sun globe or sun planet or the sun-god. That is not perfect understanding. It is partial understanding that you can understand the sun globe is full of heat and light. That's all. But how much heat, what is the temperature of heat, how much light is there, and where is the source of heat and light, that is not possible to understand. Everyone will admit this, that simply by seeing, because the sunshine is entering your room from the window, that does not mean you know everything of the sun. Similarly, this impersonal understanding of the Absolute Truth is like that. Just like sunshine is impersonal, but the sun-god is person. If sun-god is not person, how Kṛṣṇa says, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam: (BG 4.1) "This Bhagavad-gītā..." He says to Arjuna, that "This Bhagavad-gītā, science of Bhagavad-gītā, or this yoga system, bhakti-yoga system, I spoke to sun-god. Exactly like that, I am speaking to you."
So Arjuna is person, and Kṛṣṇa is person. Therefore the..., in the sun planet the predominating deity is a person. He is not imperson. So you cannot understand that person simply by seeing the sunshine. That requires better qualification, how to enter the sun planet, how to see the predominating deity. The impersonalists, they simply conclude that, the same way as we foolish persons conclude, that the sun planet is simply a fiery substance, and there is nothing, no... If there is nothing, if there is no sun-god, predominating deity or the president of the sun globe, then how Kṛṣṇa could speak with him? In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān. Just like we talk. We are talking with you. We are not talking in the sky, vacant. We are talking with persons. These are intelligent. These require intelligence. So how we can imagine that "How the sun-god can be person? It is a fiery, big fire substance, and how one can live?" This is also foolishness. "Because I cannot live in the fire, therefore nobody can live in the fire." That is my foolishness.
So similarly, impersonal realization of God, that is imperfect exactly like the understanding of the sunshine is not understanding of the sun globe and the sun-god. Everyone can understand. It is not very difficult. If you think that "Because I have seen sunshine, then I have seen everything. I have known everything of the sun..." No. You do not know even how big the sun globe is. And when you read books, when you read scientific books, you can understand it is fourteen hundred times bigger than this planet. So ultimately God is person. He is not imperson. Impersonal understanding is imperfect, partial understanding, that if God, Kṛṣṇa, is sac-cid-ānanda vigraha... Sat, cit, ānanda (Bs. 5.1). So impersonal understanding of Kṛṣṇa means you understand only the sat portion. The two other portion, cit and ānanda, you do not know. You do not know.
The Govinda is within the atom, Paramātmā. So that is another feature, all-pervading. And another feature is impersonal jyoti. And the original feature is Bhagavān. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). Finished. When you have come to this platform to understand Bhagavān, then your knowledge is perfect. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15). That is perfect knowledge. If you do not understand what is Bhagavān, then your knowledge is imperfect. You have to learn again for many, many births. Then you'll come to the point of understanding what is Kṛṣṇa.
When you'll understand tattva, that Kṛṣṇa is the original and the Paramātmā is secondary and the Brahman, impersonal, the third status.
Therefore even if you are Brahman status, you are not still aprākṛta. You are aparokṣa. Aparokṣa status, not even adhokṣaja. As I told you, there are different stages of knowledge, so the brahma-jñāna is parokṣa-jñāna. And the spiritual planets, Vaikuṇṭha knowledge, that is adhokṣaja. And the knowledge about Kṛṣṇa and His planet, Goloka Vṛndāvana, that is aprākṛta. So we have to transcend from this prākṛta status of life. It is a very, very high grade status, aprākṛta. Aprākṛta status.
Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that "Any rascal who thinks that the body of Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu is prākṛta, material, this is the greatest offense." The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think like that, that the Absolute Truth, (is) imperson; but when He comes in form He accepts a material body. This is the greatest offense, aparādha nāhi yāra ihāra rūpa.(?) Therefore they cannot understand very well because they're aparādhī. Kṛṣṇa, Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, māyāvādī kṛṣṇe aparādhī. The Māyāvādīs, they're offenders to Kṛṣṇa. Therefore they cannot understand Kṛṣṇa, offenders. Kṛṣṇa is not exposed to the offenders. Nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yogamāyā-samāvṛtaḥ (BG 7.25). So the Māyāvādīs, they cannot see Kṛṣṇa. They cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. They'll avoid Kṛṣṇa. They'll speak so many things, spiritual knowledge, but avoid Kṛṣṇa's figure, Kṛṣṇa's form. They think it is māyā. It is māyā. But it is not māyā. That is the original form. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). Because Kṛṣṇa has got the form exactly, the dvibhuja-muralī-līlā, two hands with flute. That is Kṛṣṇa's original form.
In the material world, therefore he is not satisfied. In the spiritual world, the puruṣa, the living entity, enjoys with Kṛṣṇa, not alone. Therefore you will find Kṛṣṇa is always accompanied by someone else. Either Rādhārāṇī or cowherds boy, or the gopīs, or Mother Yaśodā, or Nanda Mahārāja, or the cows and the calves, like that. Or even with the monkeys. Kṛṣṇa, you will never find alone. Therefore as soon as we speak Kṛṣṇa, you must know there are so many associates. Kṛṣṇa, just like if I say the president is coming, so one should know the president is not coming alone. He must be accompanied by his secretaries, by his military aide-de-camp, and so many other people, cabinet members. At least one dozen persons are coming with him, or with some soldiers, bodyguards. So similarly when you mean Kṛṣṇa or God, you should immediately know that He is not alone. He is not impersonal boy. He is full with opulence, full with associates. Therefore this description is of the spiritual world in the Brahma-saṁhitā, Vedic literature, cintāmaṇi-prakara-sadmasu kalpa-vṛkṣa lakṣāvṛteṣu surabhīr abhipālayantam (Bs. 5.29). This is the trees, plants, and animals.
Kṛṣṇa is everywhere. Aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-sthaṁ govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi (Bs. 5.35). He is everywhere. So how it can be impersonal? Therefore the jñānam, which considers of impersonality without any varieties, that is not jñānam. That is not niḥśreyasārthāya, that is simply a temporary appeasement. That because I am disgusted with this material varieties, let it be zero, void. That is a temporary solace. We cannot remain without varieties. That is not possible. If there is nobody here, and you sit down, make meditation, you can sit down for fifteen minutes or twenty minutes, then you will go away. This is not possible because the spirit soul, either the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Supreme Soul, or the living entity, he is also spirit, both of them are Brahman. Para-brahman and ordinary Brahman. We are ordinary Brahman and Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Brahman. So Brahman, either Supreme or ordinary is seeking after happiness. That is Brahman life. Seeking after happiness. Just like Kṛṣṇa is Para-brahman, but He is also seeking happiness with Rādhārāṇī and the gopīs and the cowherds boy and the cows and the calves.
This jagat, this material world, is existing on the spiritual prakṛti. You can calculate what is your this body. This body is existing on the spiritual body. Just like your shirt. The shirt is existing on your actual hand. The shirt has got a hand because you have got hand. So matter is impersonal. But because the superior prakṛti, jīva, he is person, therefore the matter appears like a person. Because I have got hands and legs, therefore this cloth has got hands and legs. Otherwise the cloth has no hands and legs; it is impersonal. And in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, vāsāṁsi jīrṇāni. This body is just like dress. Just like your coat has got hand, your pant has got leg, but either the pant or coat has no leg, no hand. Because you have got leg and hand, therefore the coat has got leg and hand. You can... Everyone can understand. It is very easy. So the original, the spirit soul, has got form. Therefore the cloth has been cut into form. It is very easy to understand. Otherwise how you get the form? And in this form the spirit soul is trying to enjoy this material world. But it is not puruṣa. It cannot enjoy. That is false. That is illusion. Ato gṛha-kṣetra-sutāpta-vittair janasya moho 'yam ahaṁ mameti (SB 5.5.8).
So these vīrya, these living entities, seed-giving father is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore we are in quality as good as Kṛṣṇa, as good as Kṛṣṇa. Mamaivāṁśa. The living entities, they are, Kṛṣṇa claims, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā: (BG 14.4) "And they are My part and parcel." So why we should be other than Kṛṣṇa? We are exactly of the same quality. If Kṛṣṇa is spirit, then we are spirit. He is complete spirit; we are partial spirit. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). Kṛṣṇa is living force; we are also living force. Kṛṣṇa has got creative power; we have got also creative power. Exactly all the qualities. Kṛṣṇa has got loving propensity; we have got loving propensity. Wherefrom this love has come? Because Kṛṣṇa loves Rādhārāṇī, and we are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa; therefore we have learned how to love. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the Vedānta-sūtra: "Everything is born out of the Supreme Person, everything, what we see." We are sample Kṛṣṇa, sample Kṛṣṇa. All the propensities, that we have inherited from our supreme father. Everything is there. Kṛṣṇa has got the same propensities. So why Kṛṣṇa should be imperson? That is not complete knowledge.
So from spiritual existence, how material existence come into being, that is being explained in the Sāṅkhya philosophy of Kapiladeva. So saṅkarṣaṇa-rūpaṁ puruṣam. Everywhere the puruṣa, person, puruṣa, or the enjoyer. Puruṣaṁ śāśvataṁ puruṣam. Lord is puruṣa, a personality. He is not impersonal. His energies are prakṛtis. So prakṛti-puruṣa is there. That is the spiritual world. That is also parā-prakṛti, and this material world is aparā-prakṛti. But the puruṣa is always there. Puruṣa is always puruṣa. And we are marginal prakṛti. We are also prakṛti. So ekale īśvara kṛṣṇa. So only one puruṣa, īśvara, enjoyer, controller, is Kṛṣṇa. Ekale īśvara kṛṣṇa āra saba bhṛtya (CC Adi 5.142). All others, even incarnations, even demigods, even we are—we are all servant of Kṛṣṇa. And what to speak of ourself, even the expansion of Kṛṣṇa, viṣṇu-tattva, They are also serving Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is so exalted. Therefore, Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). Even the incarnation Viṣṇu, Lord Śiva, demigods, and others—nobody is greater than Kṛṣṇa. Asamordhva, asama, nobody is equal to Him; nobody is greater than Him. Everyone is lower than Him.
You cannot stop desire. That is not possible. The kāma-sambhavaḥ... Saṅkalpa-vikalpābhyāṁ vartate kāma-sambhavaḥ. This is the mind's position. I am desiring something, and if it is not very palatable, then I reject it. I accept another desire. This is. You cannot keep the mind vacant even for a single moment. Nobody has got this experience, that mind is vacant. If, by force, you are trying to do that, it is simply laboring. It is not possible. Just like to concentrate one's mind in the vacant... Kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). Kleśaḥ, kleśaḥ adhikataras teṣām. Impersonal and void. If you want to engage your mind in the impersonality or voidness of variegatedness, it is simply very, very difficult. The best, easy way of controlling the mind... Because Kṛṣṇa has said that yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gatenāntar-ātmanā (BG 6.47), antar-ātmanā, śraddhāvān bhajate yo mām. This is the way. Anyone who is making plan, the plan-making... Kāma-sambhavaḥ means plan-making. You see the whole world, the big, big politicians. In our government, central government, there is a planning commission.
So suppose if you live eternally without any ānanda, how long you will like to live like that? Is it possible? That you cannot do. Suppose somebody lives eternally in the sky without any death. Rather, he will try to commit suicide. It is not possible. It is not possible. Just like we have got experience. If you remain for very long time—I have got experience—in the sea or in the air, you feel very uncomfortable. You want to land down, land down, another air station, another port, and feel very uncomfortable. The airplane men, they come down and they take rest on the ground. It is not our nature because it is impersonal. In the air there is no variety, simply air. Similarly, in the sea there is no variety, simply water. So it becomes suffocating. Similarly, those who are aspiring to go to the Brahman effulgence... Brahman effulgence is spiritual world, certainly, but there is no variety. There is no Kṛṣṇa's enjoying with the cowherds boys or Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī. You cannot find there. You simply remain in the Brahman effulgence.
So as this material creation has begun from material sound under the agitating, impelling method by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, similarly, by spiritual sound, you can get out of it, because sound is the central point. When it is mixed with tamas, tamo-guṇa, then the material creation begins. So similarly, if you directly catch up that sound... The sound is śabda-brahma. Sound is actually spiritual, the Vedic sound om, oṁkāra. Oṁkārāsmi sarva-vedeṣu. So Vedic sound begins: om. So that is a sound. So if we capture that sound and make further progress, śabdād anāvṛtti... In the Vedānta-sūtra it is there, anāvṛtti, no more repetition of birth and death, oṁkāra. If one can chant oṁkāra at the time of death, immediately transferred to the spiritual world, impersonal spiritual effulgence. But if you can chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, then immediately you go to the spiritual planet. These are stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. Anta-kāle, at the time of death, if you can capture this sound, oṁkāra or Hare Kṛṣṇa... If you capture oṁkāra, then you are transferred to the spiritual sky. As it is said, the sky. Śabdāt... Śabda-mātram abhūt tasmān nabhaḥ. Nabha is sky. So there is a point wherefrom the sky, the material sky, begins and there is spiritual sky. The sky is spiritual wherefrom the śabda is resounded. Because there is sky, therefore there is sound. Because there is sound, therefore the instrument of hearing sound, the ear, is there.
So everyone is becoming very great personality by bhauma-ijya-dhīḥ. The land in which he has taken birth is worshipable, not this Deity. Deity is impersonal, but the land is personal. This is their intelligence. Therefore in śāstra it is said, yasyātma-buddhiḥ kunape tri-dhātuke (SB 10.84.13). The mistake begins from this misunderstanding that "I am this body." Therefore all other mistakes What are those? Yasyātma-buddhiḥ kunape tri-dhātuke..., svā-dhīḥ kalatrādiṣu: family. "My wife. This is my wife. This is my children. This is my father. This is my mother. We are in a family." Svā-dhīḥ: "They are my kith and kin. Others, they are all my enemies." So this crippled thought Yasyātma-buddhiḥ kunape tri-dhātuke svā-dhīḥ kalatrādiṣu (SB 10.84.13). Because they have no knowledge that "Nobody is my father. Nobody is my mother. I am nobody's son. We are simply assembled together under certain condition, just like some straws gathered together by the waves of the river, and again, by the same river, it is tossed here and there and then the straw remains one."
So, nature's way will work. You cannot stop them. But because they cannot give up attachment for these material activities, they put some manifesto, that "We are not working for this. After finishing this task, then we shall take to the consideration of spiritual life." So this is called will o' the wisp. What is that, will o' the wisp? There is a fire, and the fire goes ahead, and the man follows. It is something like that. They cannot do anything. Actually, they have got attachment for these material activities, and they put forward different types of manifesto. But if one is serious about going back to home, back to Godhead... First of all, they have no such information that there is a place where God lives. They think it is all fictitious. (So) why it is fictitious? If you accept there is God, why, what is the objection to accept a place for Him? We have got our place, we have got our residential quarter, and God has provided us all these facilities, and He has no facility? He is impersonal? He has no place? Just see.
So, God, whether impersonal or personal, that we cannot conclude by our speculation. It is not possible. Durvibhāvyam. Durvibhāvyam means beyond your conception, beyond your speculation. But He says that idaṁ śarīram. He has got His body;He is not impersonal. He comes sometimes as incarnation. We can see Kṛṣṇa with two hands, two legs, one head. Veṇuṁ kvaṇantam aravinda dalāyatākṣaṁ barhāvataṁsam asitāmbuda-sundarāṅgam (Bs. 5.30). This is described in the Vedic literature. He has two hands and He is playing on flute. He has got the peacock feather on His head. It is not imagination. The Kṛṣṇa arcā-mūrti, it is not imagination, as rascals think, that they have imaginated an idol. This is not idol worship. This is actually... I have several times explained that here is Kṛṣṇa, personally present. We should always think like that, not that it is idol worship. But durvibhāvyam means although He is present, the less intelligent class of men, they will think that "They are worshiping one statue." But that is not possible.
Our knowledge is sense perception. Sense perception, akṣaja jñānam. That will not act there. Acintya. Therefore we have to accept in that way. Idaṁ śarīram, but He has His body. He has His body, and because we cannot conceive, He, out of His causeless mercy, He presents Himself in a form which we can see. That is arcā-vigraha, arcā-mūrti. A vigraha. Arcā means the form which we can worship. If God is impersonal Avyaktāsakta-cetasām. Kleśo adhikataras teṣām. If we accept God as impersonal He is not impersonal. He says idaṁ śarīram. He is personal. But our present senses cannot perceive. That is the difficulty. Therefore out of His causeless mercy He has appeared in a form which you can see, you can touch, you can dress, you can offer garland, you can offer food—to accept your service. That is God's mercy. Don't think that "Because God mercifully has come before Me in a form which we can perceive, which we can see, with which we can serve," not that "He is not God." That is rascaldom. God is there. Otherwise Caitanya Mahāprabhu, as soon as He entered the Jagannātha's temple, immediately He fainted. Does it mean He made a fun? No. He saw the Supreme Personality of Godhead present there.
So Ṛṣabhadeva said that "I have got My body," idaṁ śarīram, when He appears to solve our problem, whether God is personal or impersonal. Impersonal is there, there is no doubt, but what is that impersonal? Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagat avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4). That is impersonal. No, He's Māyā: "By Me." That means His energy. His energy is distributed throughout the whole creation, cosmic manifestation. But He is still there. Māyā. Unless He is there Not that because He is spread everywhere—vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti (BG 7.19)—it does not mean He is finished. That is material understanding. In the materially, if you take a piece of paper and make it a small pieces and throw it, then the original paper is no longer existing. That is material conception. But spiritual conception? Pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate (Īśo Invocation). That is spiritual idea. If you take cent percent God from God, still He is cent percent. That is pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate. Īśāvāsyam idam. So Kṛṣṇa says that māyā, "In My another feature, Vasudeva feature," mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. Everything is God, but everything is not God. That is explained by God.
Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said, "Any rascal"—of course, "rascal" he did not say; I say—that. "Anyone who considers the body of Kṛṣṇa is prakṛta"—prakṛta means material—"that is the greatest offense." The Māyāvādīs, they say so. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, māyāvādī haya kṛṣṇe aparādhī. They think that when... "God is impersonal, but when He becomes a person, He accepts the material body." That is wrong. Here it is said that mukta-liṅgasya bhagavata ṛṣabhasya. It is no difference. Even a big scholar, while writing comments on Bhagavad-gītā, when Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65), he warns the reader, "It is not to the person. The soul or the spirit within the person." Means he is thinking Kṛṣṇa as ordinary person, and he's a big scholar. This is going on.
So according to Vedic civilization, the king or the president or the ruling chief must be representative of God. That is wanted. Therefore you will find in the Bhagavad-gītā, imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ: (BG 4.2) "This Bhagavad-gītā was understood by the rājarṣi." Rājarṣi means... Rāja means king, and ṛṣi means great saintly person. Rājarṣi. So education, culture, is meant for the higher two classes, the brāhmaṇas and the kṣatriyas. Education means for them, those who are intelligent, for them. Education is not for masses. Now it is called mass education. So mass education means it will produce undesirable elements. That's all. So the Vedic system is there must be first of all the most intelligent class of men. They should be given education how to become self-controlled, śamaḥ; how to control the mind, how to control the senses; śama damaḥ satyam, how to become truthful; śaucam, how to become cleanse; śamo damaḥ satyaṁ śaucaṁ titikṣa, how to become tolerant; ārjavam, how to become simple, no intricacy; śamo damas satyaṁ śaucaṁ titikṣa ārjavam eva ca, jñānaṁ vijñānam āstikyam, full of knowledge; and vijñānam, practical application in life; āstikyam, and to believe in the existence of God or knowing God partially or fully. Partially knowing God means impersonal or Paramātmā. This is partial. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11).
God is called supreme father, not only in your Bible, but in the Vedas also. In all literature. And actually He's father, because the Vedānta says the Absolute Truth is the original father, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), from whom everything has taken birth or emanated. So the supreme father cannot be impersonal. He's a person. And in the Vedas, it is confirmed: nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko bahūnāṁ yo vidadhāti kāmān (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). He is the supreme eternal amongst all eternals. We are all eternal, living entities, and He's the supreme eternal. And we are all living entities, cetana, life symptoms. We have got everything, all desires. So similarly the supreme father has got all desires. Our desires are born because He has got desires. Just like we like to love, young boy, young girl. They're in love. Wherefrom this idea of love comes? It comes from there, Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Because we are part and parcel of God, we have got all the instincts of God in minute quantity. But because here we are in this material world, material world means where God is forgotten. That is called material world. In this temple we are not in the material world. We are not in New York. We are in Vaikuṇṭha. Because we have not forgotten Kṛṣṇa. Yes. That is the definition given by the Vedic literature. Transcendental. Anyone who's living within this temple... I'll give you one example. Just like if a ship comes from foreign country, that ship may be within the border of your country, or within your country—that ship is not within the law of your country. The ambassadors, the embassies, they are not within the law of USA. I give you some practical example. Similarly, anyone who is engaged in Kṛṣṇa's service, anyplace it may be, that spot is not within the material world.
So we have to observe all these regulative principles if we want to become first-class man. And without becoming first-class man, nobody can understand what is God. That is not possible. Fourth-class man cannot understand. It is not possible. Brahma jānātīti brāhmaṇaḥ. A brāhmaṇa, or the first-class man, is he because he knows Brahman. He knows Brahman, what is God—even not perfectly well, but Brahman, the impersonal conception of the Supreme. This impersonal conception of the Supreme Absolute Truth is also brahma-jñāna, but that is partial. God is sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). His form, His person... Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "My dear Arjuna, you, Me, and all these men who have come here, we existed like this in the past." That means we are all individuals, because when Kṛṣṇa was speaking in the battlefield, He is person, and He was teaching Arjuna—he is also person. And the soldiers and other kings, they are also all persons. So Kṛṣṇa says that "It is not that we are imperson in the past or we shall become imperson in the future." No. Just like, take another example, that before our birth, accepting this body, I was a person, you were a person. And according to our personal different activities, pious or impious, we have got this body. So I was person before the beginning of my this body, and after my death, I shall remain a person, and I shall accept another body. Dhīras tatra na muhyati (BG 2.13). Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ. So when I become imperson? Past, present, future, there are three different phases of time. So in the past I was a person, at present I am a person, and in future I shall remain a person. So where is the question of imperson?
This is spoken by Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā in the Second Chapter, that "My dear Arjuna, it is not that we did not exist in the past. We existed in this way, and we are existing now in the same way, and we shall exist." That means our personality is never lost. And therefore we see so many varieties of men. Each one is a person. You cannot find anyone exactly similar to the other, because everyone has got his personal propensities. And according to the personal propensities and desires, Kṛṣṇa is giving us different opportunities, and that is different body. Karmaṇā daiva-netreṇa (SB 3.31.1). Just like in the court, the..., everyone is judged as person, not wholesale. The judge not says that "Now all you have come here"—some of them are complainants and some of them are respondents—"so you stand together. I give this judgment." No. Everyone is personally judged. And everyone is given reward or punishment personally. So where is the question of imperson?
Guest (2): From God.
Prabhupāda: Then how God can be nirākāra or impersonal?
Guest (2): Nirākāra means all-pervading.
Prabhupāda: That is another thing. All-pervading we also accept. He is brahma-jyotir. He is spread all over the creation. That is His nirākāra. Another meaning of nirākāra, that He hasn't got His form like us—sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1)—you may say that. Or nirākāra means where the varieties are not manifested. Just like you go to the sunshine. You don't find any rest. Your plane must fly on, fly on, fly on, unless you get a support in some planet. Either you go to the moon planet or remain in this planet, you must have a support. Otherwise the effulgence, the sun effulgence, the sunlight is not (indistinct). Similarly, brahma-jyotir is like that, just like sunshine, but you cannot rest there. If you want rest, then you have to take shelter under the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. That is stated in the Bhāgavatam. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas: (SB 10.2.32) Those who are in the impersonal situation, they think themselves that they have become liberated. Exactly the same example. Suppose you are very high in the sunshine. Do you think, "Now I am liberated from worldly connection. I am far, far away, or high"? But unless you have shelter, you have to fly. This is crude example. Similarly, these impersonalists, they are in the liberated atmosphere, that's a fact. Brahman. He has realized that "I am not this matter. I am Brahman." And because he has no information in the brahma-jyotir there are innumerable planets, he thinks that "This is all in all, this jyoti, brahma-jyotir." That is his imperfect knowledge.
Ultimate end means you can remain. Go on flying, flying, flying. But that will exhaust your energy and you'll like to take shelter in any planet. And because they have no information of the Vaikuṇṭha planets, they again come to these material planets. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Because they have no rest, they become perturbed. Therefore this śloka says, ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "Because these impersonalists, although they are almost liberated, still, on account of their negligence to the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord, without having shelter, their intelligence is not purified still." They are simply accepting something opposite to these imperfect varieties of this material world. They want to make the spiritual world without varieties because they have got a very bad experience of this material varieties. So their conception is just the opposite. Just the opposite. There must not be any varieties. Just like there are... They say Kṛṣṇa... Because they are convinced the Supreme Brahman is impersonal, brahma-jyotir, so when brahma-jyotir appears, He must take a form of this material world. Just like we are spiritual sparks, but we have taken this material form in this material world, so they take it also that God, when He comes, appears, He also accepts a material body. That is called Māyāvādī.
Punaḥ punaḥ (indistinct) the stock which we have already got, you can study and take lessons from the Vedic literature. Make your life perfect. What kind of residential quarters are there throughout the whole universe, how many universes are there, what is the special features of different residents. But don't take this nonsense instruction that "Except on this planet there is no life other planet." This is simply nonsense. Every planet is congested with living entities. This is the description of the śāstra. Jana, jana means "congested with," but different types. Just like they have come from Vaikuṇṭha, their bodily feature is different. We have got experience here on this planet in some portion there are black people, some portion there are white people, some portion there are yellow people. There are so many manifestation within this planet. Just imagine how many. This is God's creation, different varieties. Just like we see on this planet. Why on this planet? Even on this Hawaii island how many beautiful things, flowers, trees, and fruits. That is God's creation. Ānanda. Variety is the mother of enjoyment. If you want enjoyment there must be variety. Impersonal without variety, zero, these are not enjoyment. This is all rascaldom. The voidists make everything zero. Why zero? There must be varieties. Variety is the mother of enjoyment.
So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they prefer sāyujya, to merge into the existence of impersonal existence. A living entity can live, can remain in the Brahman effulgence as a particle of shining. Just like there are many molecular particles in the sunshine, similarly, the living entities also can cluster together and live as a small particle of spiritual shining, and that is called brahma-sāyujya-mukti. But that kind of existence is subjected to fall down again.
- ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas
- tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ
- āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ
- patanty adho...
- (SB 10.2.32)
Because the living entities, they want varieties of enjoyment, but in that impersonal existence there is no varieties of enjoyment, therefore, when they desire varieties of enjoyment, they have come to this material world. So even they merge into the effulgence of brahma-jyotir, there is cause; there is chance of falling. Not all. Some of them may go to the planets, but there is chance.
Kṛṣṇa is offering that samagram, sama, "In fullness, completely, as you can understand Me, I am speaking to you." Asaṁśayam—without any doubt. Doubt there may be. Because God is great, we are very small; how we can understand God? There is always some doubt, whether He's personal, impersonal, all-pervading. There are so many different conception of God. But therefore God Himself says asaṁśayam, "without any doubt." And samagram, "completely." Asaṁśayam samagraṁ māṁ yathā jñāsyasi tac chṛṇu (BG 7.1). Just like to study a subject matter, it takes some time, takes little endeavor to associate with person who knows the thing rightly. In this way we can understand God also. Just like we understand so many science, so many arts, by patience. Then that is Rūpa Gosvāmī's advice: niścayād dhairyāt. Dhairyāt means patience. We have to learn patiently. Niścayād dhairyāt tat-tat-karma-pravartanāt sato vṛtteḥ saṅga-tyāgāt ṣaḍbhir bhaktiḥ prasidhyati.
Śaṅkarācārya, after Buddha, His Holiness Śaṅkarācārya appeared to drive away Buddhism, and he established again Vedic religion. But that Vedic religion, being impersonal, that is also not Vedic religion. That is also another thing, that God is person. Nityo nityānām. Nityānām, the so many living entities—every one is person. How God can be imperson? If God is the supreme father... If you are a person, then how your father can be imperson? So that is imperfect knowledge. When we speak of God as imperson, that is imperfect knowledge.
- vadanti tat tattva-vidas
- tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam
- brahmeti paramātmeti
- bhagavān iti śabdyate
- (SB 1.2.11)
The Absolute Truth is presented in three different phases. One is Brahman, impersonal Brahman, another is localized Paramātmā, and another is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So we shall discuss again.
Then the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, Rāmanujācārya, Madhvācārya, they said, brahma satya. And what is Brahman? Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). Brahman, first realization, impersonal; then localized; then person. Just like Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam: (BG 4.1) "Long, long years ago, millions of years ago, I spoke this philosophy to the sun-god, Vivasvān." So, Kṛṣṇa, as He was instructing Arjuna, similarly, He was instructing the sun-god that... Arjuna is a person. Kṛṣṇa is a person. Similarly, sun-god is also a person, and Kṛṣṇa is a person. And Kṛṣṇa says in the Second Chapter of Bhagavad-gītā that "My dear Arjuna, you, Me, and all of them who are standing here in this battlefield, we were existing in the past, we are existing now, and we shall continue to exist." So God is person; we are also person. We existed in the past as person, we are existing now as person and we shall continue to exist as person. There is no question of imperson. If past, present, future, everywhere is a person, where is the question of imperson? So imperson means... Just like the sun-god is person, but the sunshine is imperson. Those who are in the sunshine, they cannot understand what is sun-god. That is not possible. It requires strength. If you want to go and see the sun-god Vivasvān, that requires qualification. It is not so easy. You cannot enter even the sun planet, what to speak of talking with him. But Kṛṣṇa could talk. Kṛṣṇa can go anywhere. And when there is sun-god, then "god" means not alone. A king does not mean alone. King means he has got his kingdom, he has got his subjects, he has got minister, he has got military strength. Everything is there. So similarly, if we accept Kṛṣṇa's statement that "I spoke to sun-god," the sun-god is there in the sun globe, and he has his kingdom, so dazzling kingdom. It looks like fire, blazing. But don't think it is impersonal. Impersonal? How Kṛṣṇa could talk with him? There is no question of impersonality.
So nirviśeṣa-vādī, impersonalists, are like that. In the creation of God, there are varieties, not impersonal. Therefore we see, we are sitting here, you won't find two men of the same feature of the body. Even there are twin, still, we'll find some difference. The father, mother can see. There is variety. Here it is said, bhūteṣu guṇa-vaicitryāt. They are guṇa-vaicitryāt. Therefore we don't find two men of the same nature, two men of the same thinking. Varieties, varieties, this is going on. But that is our cause of bondage, varieties. But if we can surpass these varieties, as Kṛṣṇa advises in the Bhagavad-gītā, trai-guṇya-viṣayā vedā nistrai-guṇyo bhavārjuna. Nistrai-guṇyo, nirguṇa. Nirguṇa does not mean no varieties. Nirguṇa means not these material varieties—the spiritual varieties. So they misunderstand. Spiritual varieties they think material varieties. So nistraigunyo: we have to overcome the varieties of this material nature. We have come to the spiritual platform. And how it is possible?
So, so long you are in this material world of duality, then you have to commit sinful activities. Therefore the whole Vedic literature is meant for taking you to the spiritual world. Tamasi mā jyotir gamā: "Don't remain in this material world of darkness. Come to the spiritual world." Tamasi mā jyotir gamā. This is instruction. And jyotir means that spiritual world. First appreciation of the jyotirmān, Brahman, Brahmaloka, Brahman effulgence, that is the first entrance. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti (SB 1.2.11). Just like you see the sunshine: it is impersonal, only light. But if you have got power, strength, if you can go to the sun planet, that is another. This is also... Sun planet is also shining. The heat and light is there. And in the sunshine there is heat and light and shining. But the temperature in the sun globe is different from this temperature. And if you have got strength, then you can see who is reigning over that sun planet. In the Vedic literature you will find his name. Imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). The name of the predominating deity, or the president of the sun globe, is Vivasvān. His name is also there. His address is also there. The God is there. God's name is there. God's address is there. Now if you have got power to go there, you can go. Just like Indira Gandhi or the President's name is there, address is there, but if you are fit to see him or her, that depends on you. Not that because you cannot see the President or Indira Gandhi, she is nirākāra. This is foolishness. This is foolishness. Why God should be nirākāra?
Yes. So many judges and high-court retired justice, they also came. And one retired judge, Gaṅgeśvarānanda, he admitted that "Swamijī, for the first time it is my experience that you are explaining Personality of Godhead so nicely." He was also under the impression God is impersonal. Gaṅgeśvarānanda, yes. (break) Dr. Rao is not here. Who will speak in Hindi? (Hindi or Bengali) (end)
The kicking on the chest of Viṣṇu, that was a different matter. But the so-called brāhmaṇas are very much proud that "We are so great that we can kick on the chest of Viṣṇu." They described this incident very proudly, nonsensically. Bhṛgv-ādayaḥ. Bhṛgu is considered to be great ṛṣi. But Yamarāja says—he is mahājana, he is authority—that "They are also contaminated." That Bhṛgu dared to kick on the chest of Viṣṇu, being contaminated by the brahminical... "I am so great. I can do that." So when such great personalities like Bhṛgu Muni, Parāśara Muni, er, I mean to say, Vasiṣṭha, and Ātreya, they are so much contaminated, what to speak of others? How they will understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead by mental speculation? They will conclude naturally, "Imperson." That's all. It is not possible for them. Only the devotees, they can understand what is the actual identification of the Absolute Truth. Yasyehitaṁ na viduḥ spṛṣṭa-māyāḥ sattva-pradhānā api kiṁ tato 'nye. What others can do it.
Just like the sunshine is a combination of molecular parts, something shining. Is it not? Similarly, brahma-jyotir is combination of the individual parts and parcels of God. But without individual activity they cannot stay in the brahma-jyotir for long. Because everyone wants some individual activity. Just like we are sitting together now. After some hour, every one of us will feel what is our individual... Everyone will be engaged in his individual activity. Therefore, according to Bhagavat-siddhānta, āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanti (SB 10.2.32). The individual soul who simply tries to merge into the effulgence, Brahman effulgence... That position is attained after many, many years' austerity and penances. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa. Kṛcchreṇa means with great trouble and difficulty one is elevated to that position, merging into the impersonal brahma-jyotir. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padam (SB 10.2.32). That is called paraṁ padam. But again says, patanty adhaḥ: "But they still, again they are prone to fall down." Why they fall down? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ: "Because they do not care for Your lotus feet."
So Prahlāda Mahārāja says that this kind of pleasure, happiness... Sukham aindriyakaṁ daityā. He is particularly addressing his friend, daityā, because they are sons of daityā, demons. Just like at the present moment ninety-nine per cent of the population, they are daityās, demons. What is the difference between a demon and a demigod? Daityā means the sons of the Diti. So daitya. And deva. Deva means devotees or those who accept the supremacy of the Lord. They are called deva. Viṣṇu-bhakto bhaved daiva āsuras tad-viparyayaḥ. Anyone who is viṣṇu-bhakta, accepting God as the supreme controller, they are called demigods. And āsuras tad-viparyayaḥ, and just the opposite number... What is that opposite number? "What is God? Why shall I accept God? God is dead. There is no God. God is impersonal." They are daityās or demons.
If you make God your order-supplier—"My dear God, I am in need of something for my sense enjoyment. Please supply"—that He will not agree. Therefore those who go to God for sense enjoyment and become frustrated, they say, "There is no God." This atheism and declaration that there is no God, it is a question of sense gratification. So God is not meant for satisfying your senses. You are meant for satisfying God's senses. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And because the atheist class, they do not want to serve the senses of God, therefore they make imperson. As soon as we make God impersonal, there is no sense that "I have now to supply." And here to see the picture: God is eating. God is eating. He has become so dependent on His devotee that, if the devotee will give Him something to eat, then He will eat. So that is the position. There is a position like that. By love, God will be... Instead of yourself becoming dependent on God, God will become dependent on you. There is such a stage. God will ask you, "My dear father, will you give Me something to eat?" There is stage like that. It is stage, a platform of love. By love everything is possible. All right, let us have saṅkīrtana. (end)
In the madhyama-adhikārī he can see four things. What is that? Four things means, first of all the Supreme Lord, īśvara, the controller, he can see. He can see means he understands, he appreciates, he can conceive, "Yes, the Supreme Lord is there". There is no more theoretical. So īśvara, and tad-adhīneṣu, and persons who have become devotee, he can understand, "Here is a devotee." Īśvare tad-adhīneṣu bāliśeṣu. Bāliśa means he knows imperson. They do not know what is God, what is to be done, they are called bāliśa. Just like children, arbhakaḥ, bāliśa. And then dviṣāt, envious. Just like you have experienced so many rascals, as soon as they hear of God, immediately they become agitated. They are called dviṣāt, envious, demons. So four things, God, His devotees, and the innocent person, and the demonic atheist. He can see, madhyama-adhikārī. And then he behaves with these four classes of men differently. What is that? Prema, for Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Lord, how to increase love. That is first business, prema. And those who are devotees, to make friendship with them maitrī. Those who are higher than him, he should offer very respectful obeisances, those who are equal, treat them with nicely, and those who are lower then instruct them, bāliśeṣu. Those who are innocent, how to raise him in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. This is preaching. And dviṣatsu, upekṣaḥ, those who are atheist, don't associate with them. Don't associate with them. That is the madhyama-adhikārī.
So in this way we have to understand Kṛṣṇa, the Lord, devaḥ, how He is working, transcendentally. That is paśyaty acakṣaḥ, acakṣuḥ, śṛṇoti, akarṇaḥ. His hearing, His seeing, His eating is different from us. Therefore it is said, aṅgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛtti-manti (Bs. 5.32). If we offer at His lotus feet something, He eats. He can eat with His leg. Therefore how His eating process can be equal to us? Therefore there are two contradictions, paśyati, acakṣuḥ. Śṛnoti, akarṇaḥ. This is to be understood. Not that He is impersonal. His personality is different from our personality. We cannot eat witl our leg, but Kṛṣṇa can eat with, by His leg. He can see by His leg, He can hear by His finger. This is called aṅgani yasya sakalendriya-vṛtti-manti (Bs. 5.32). He is perfect. In this way you have to understand Kṛṣṇa. So, as soon as we come in touch with Kṛṣṇa by devotional service, then we become abhayam, no more fear. As soon as we are in the material world, bhayam. Kṛṣṇa's another name is Abhaya. Bhajahū re mana śrī-nanda-nandana abhaya-caraṇāravinda re, abhaya. His name is Abhaya. So if you come in touch with Kṛṣṇa by devotional service, and there is no more fear. Everyone is afraid. But, who is a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, nārāyaṇa-parāḥ, nārāyaṇa-parāḥ sarve na kutaścana bibhyati (SB 6.17.28). (end)
So sva-pāda-mūle patitaṁ tam arbhakam. Very innocent child. If an innocent child like Prahlāda Mahārāja, he can get so much mercy of Nṛsiṁha-deva, so pierceful appearance of the Lord that even Lakṣmī could not approach... Aśruta. Adṛṣṭa aśruta pūrva. There was no such form of the Lord. Even Lakṣmī did not know. But Prahlāda Mahārāja, he's not afraid. He knows, "Here is my Lord." Just like the cub of a lion, he is not afraid of the lion. He immediately jumps to the head of the lion because he knows, "It is my father. It is my mother." Similarly, Prahlāda Mahārāja is not afraid, although Brahmā and others, all demigods, became afraid to approach the Lord. He simply as an innocent child came and offered his obeisances. Tam arbhakaṁ vilokya. So, so God is not impersonal. Immediately he could understand, "Oh, here is an innocent child. He has been harassed by his father so much and now he's offering his obeisances unto me." Vilokya devaḥ kṛpayā pariplutaḥ. He became very much, I mean to say, melted with mercy. So thing, everything is there. Don't think that God has no feeling, thinking, feeling. No. Everything is there. Unless He has got sympathetic feeling in Him, where we have got it? Because everything is coming from God. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1).
So similarly, He is represented in His name. Abhinnatvān nāma-nāminoḥ (CC Madhya 17.133). When you are chanting the holy name of Kṛṣṇa don't think this is sound vibration and Kṛṣṇa is different. No. Abhinnatvān. Nāma-cintāmaṇi-kṛṣṇaḥ. As Kṛṣṇa is cintāmaṇi, similarly, His holy name is also cintāmaṇi. Nāma-cintāmaṇi-kṛṣṇaḥ caitanya-rasa-vigrahaḥ. Caitanya, full consciousness, nāma-cintāmaṇi-kṛṣṇaḥ. If we associate with name, that you must know, that Kṛṣṇa is fully conscious of your service. You are addressing, "He Kṛṣṇa! He Rādhārāṇī! Kindly engage me in Your service." Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra means, Hare Kṛṣṇa, "He Kṛṣṇa, he Rādhārāṇī, he energy, kindly engage me in your service." Ayi nanda-tanuja patitaṁ kiṅkaraṁ māṁ viṣame bhavāmbudhau. This is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's teaching. "O my Lord, Nanda-tanuja..." Kṛṣṇa becomes very glad when you associate His name, His activities, with some devotee. He's not impersonal. Kṛṣṇa has no name, but when He deals with His devotee, there is a name. Just like Kṛṣṇa dealing with Nanda Mahārāja, that Nanda Mahārāja's wooden slipper... Yaśodāmayī asked the child Kṛṣṇa You have seen the picture—"Can you bring the slipper of your father?" "Yes!" Immediately took on the head. You see? This is Kṛṣṇa. So Nanda Mahārāja became very pleased: "Oh, your son is very nice. He can bear such a load." So this is dealing.
Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu is addressing Kṛṣṇa, ayi nanda-tanuja. "O Kṛṣṇa, who is born out of the body of Nanda Mahārāja..." Just like the father is the body—giving person, seed, seed-giving father, similarly, Kṛṣṇa, although He is the origin of everything, but still, He is born by the seed of Nanda Mahārāja. This is Kṛṣṇa-līlā. Ayi nanda-tanuja patitaṁ kiṅkaraṁ māṁ viṣame bhavām-budhau. Caitanya Mahāprabhu never addressed Kṛṣṇa, "O the almighty." This is impersonal. He says, ayi nanda-tanuja, limited, "son of Nanda Mahārāja." Son of Nanda Mahārāja. So this is bhakti. He's unlimited. Just like Kuntīdevī was surprised that, when (s)he thought that Kṛṣṇa was afraid of Yaśodāmayī. That śloka you know. So he was, she was surprised that "Kṛṣṇa who is so exalted and great that everyone is afraid of Him, but He has become afraid of Yaśodāmayī."
So He has expanded by His energy, by His part and parcel, and everywhere the same quality is there. But there are proportion. Just like when there is fire there is bursting out of sparks. Some of the spark are very big; some of the spark are small, some of them, very small. In this way there are proportion. Similarly, all living entities, all energy, they are all expansion of Kṛṣṇa. The material energy, the spiritual energy, the marginal energy, they are all expansion. Just like sunlight, expansion of the sun. And in the sunlight... It is very easy to understand. In the sunlight there are so many planets, and each and every planet have varieties of production, mountains, seas, ocean, trees, or trees. There are varieties of trees, animals, each and every planet. So nothing is void or impersonal. Everything is full of varieties, personalities. So you can understand. And what are these planets? These planets are called dvīpa. Dvīpa means island. Just like this is an island. We are sitting in this Kauai island. Why it is island? Because all around water. Similarly, all these planets are called also islands. Why? Because all around the space, space water. As this is surrounded by water, the planets are surrounded by space. So if you take the space, ethereal ocean, then it is island. Every planet is an island.
That is the instruction of Prahlāda Mahārāja. He is deriding that manye dhanābhijana rūpa. Abhijana. Abhijana means born in great nation or in great family. Nobody can be proud that "Because I am born of a very rich family and because I am born of a very great, rich nation like America, therefore I can purchase the favor of God." No. That is not possible. Prahlāda Mahārāja says it is not possible. Nārādhanāya bhavanti parasya puṁsaḥ. Parasya puṁsaḥ means the transcendental personality. He excels all personalities. We are all persons. The Lord, Kṛṣṇa, or God, He is also a person, as you are a person, I am a person. He is not imperson. Otherwise how He can be richest, the most famous, the most beautiful? These qualifications are for person. But He is so great, God is so great, His personality is so great that He transcends all personalities. Parasya puṁso. Parasya means transcendental, and puṁso, the person. God is never imperson. Impersonal understanding of the Absolute Truth is the beginning of transcendental knowledge. But if you make further progress, you will find Him the Supreme Person. The Supreme Person... Just like we offer our humble prayers, govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ. He is the original person. In the Bible you will see, "Man is made after God." This feature, this form, is just in imitation of Kṛṣṇa's form. Because Kṛṣṇa has got two hands, because Kṛṣṇa has got two legs, one head, so we are imitation. We are sample God. So just imagine how the original person, the original Personality of Godhead, is opulent, rich, beautiful, famous, so many. All good qualifications, all opulences, are present there.
Our temple is Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. Just the picture, Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. So he went to the temple of Goddess Kālī. He saw the Goddess Kālī's very ferocious feature, and he (she) has got one, what is called, chopper in her hand, and it is, she's chopping the heads of the demons, and she has the garland of the heads of the demons, and engaged in fighting. So he's supposed to be intelligent man. He said that "I find in this temple there is God." "Why? Why you conclude like that?" "That in every temple I saw, that the god, deity, is doing something. But here I see the God is enjoying. He has nothing to do." Very nice conclusion. This is Vedic conclusion. Why, if he's God...? Nowadays the nonsense are becoming God by meditation. But does it mean by meditation one can become God? Do you think a dog meditates and becomes God? This is all nonsense. (shouting:) God is God! Always God! Just like Kṛṣṇa. He's God in the lap of His mother. The Putānā, the demonic woman, came to poison the child. She came in a very beautiful girl's dress and asked Yaśodā, "Oh, Yaśodāmayī, you have got very nice baby. Will you kindly give me? I can offer my breast." Yaśodāmayī was very simple village woman. "Oh, yes, you can take my child." But her intention was, she smeared poison on her breast, as soon as Kṛṣṇa will suck, then the child will die. So this is the demonic spirit. They want to kill Kṛṣṇa always. That's all. "God is dead." They want to see how Kṛṣṇa can be killed, how Kṛṣṇa is dead. That is their business. "There is no God" or "God is impersonal" or "God is dead" or... So many things. That means they want to see there is no God. Or to kill God. Kaṁsa, always thinking, "As soon as Kṛṣṇa will take His birth, I'll take the baby and kill." But God is always God.
So our prayers should be to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore we pray, govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **. We worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the original person. We are all persons. Just like your father is person; therefore you are person. Your son is person. Similarly, your father's father is a person, his father person, his father person. So to Brahma, his, he's also person. His father, Viṣṇu, is person. His father, his father, everywhere—Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Person. God cannot be without being person. He must be person. This impersonal understanding of God, nirākāravādī, that nirākār... Of course, in the Vedic language, when we speak nirākāra, ni, ni means negative, and ākāra, ākāra means form. So negative form. Negative form means not that He has no form but He has no form like you and me. That is negative. Form means just like we have got form. So what is the value of this form? This form will be changed after few years. As soon as I give up this body this form is changed. Just like we change our dress. Therefore He hasn't got a form like this to be changed. Therefore He's sometimes called nirākāra. Ākāra is there, and that is also explained in the Brahma-saṁhitā that īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). "Oh, Kṛṣṇa has got a form, sir? How you say that He is the Supreme? Brahman is the Supreme." No. He has form certainly. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ. His form is not like you and me. Sac-cid-ānanda. His form is eternal, full of bliss, and full of knowledge. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ anādir. He has no source. He has no source. He is original. He is the source of everything, anādir ādir, and He is the original Govinda. Govinda means He gives pleasure. How do you perceive pleasure? Through your senses. So therefore go means senses and vinda means pleasure. So if you serve Kṛṣṇa in your purified senses, then you really become happy. Therefore His name is Govinda. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ, anādir ādir govinda sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1). The cause of all causes. So He is therefore Jagadīśa. Jagadīśa.
Kṛṣṇa said, but we do not take Kṛṣṇa's words. Śānti means we have to accept these three principles. What is that? Kṛṣṇa is the enjoyer; He is the master; He is the proprietor. Bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sar... You are performing yajña. You are performing tapasya, penances. You are observing brahmacarya. So many there are, different rules and regulations. But what is the idea? To serve Kṛṣṇa, or to satisfy... (break) Sense will remain. We do not become imperson, senseless or non-sense. No. The sense must be there. It should be purified. And as soon as we purify, then we have no other business than to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. And so long we are not purified, we satisfy our senses. This is the difference between karma and bhakti.
So God is one, and His energy is also one, and there is no separation of energy from the energetic. Just like fire and heat. Heat cannot be separated from fire. But still, heat is not fire. I may be heated by high temperature, but if there is fire, then I will be burned—different action—although both of them are the same, heat and fire. Therefore the conclusion should be sarvedam akhilaṁ jagat parasya brahmaṇaḥ śakti. Parasya. Parasya means "of the Supreme Brahman." Supreme Brahman is Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). And Arjuna also accepts Kṛṣṇa as Para-brahman. So everything is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa said, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā: (BG 9.4) "I am spread all over the creation.' Avyakta-mūrtinā. But you cannot see Kṛṣṇa. Here we know there is air, there is ether, there is light, there is heat—everything is here. We can see it, experience it, but avyakta-mūrtinā—Kṛṣṇa is invisible, imperson. That is the difference between person and imperson. There are philosophers who think that the Absolute Truth is person, and there are other philosophers, they think the Absolute Truth is imperson. But we followers of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, we accept both. He is person and imperson also at the same time, simultaneously. Acintya-bhedābheda-tattva.
So Prahlāda Mahārāja knows it, that naiṣā parāvara-matir bhavato: "You have no such thing as discriminating." So one may say that "I may... I am foolish, I may not surrender to Kṛṣṇa cent percent, but why He is not kind cent percent?" So that is Kṛṣṇa's discrimination. Why He should? He can... He can become cent percent, but He does not do so. That means Kṛṣṇa is sentient; He is not impersonal. Don't think that whatever you are doing, Kṛṣṇa cannot see. In the Deity room, if you think that "This Deity is made of brass. Whatever nonsense I can do, He does not see," no, He can see everything. Añgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛttimanti paśyanti pānti kalayanti. He sees. You rascal, you do not know how Kṛṣṇa sees. You think that "He has these brass-made eyes. He cannot see. I can do all nonsense with..." No. That is not. He can see everything. Paśyanti pānti. Añgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛttimanti. He can see with His lotus feet. He can see with His hand. We can see simply with our eyes, but Kṛṣṇa can see with all the... Añgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛttimanti. You have seen. Kṛṣṇa is playing the flute. The fingers are open. A finger touching: "What you are doing?" We do not know the fingers can also see. But this is absolute. Kṛṣṇa can use His any energy, any power, any part of the body, for anything else. This is Kṛṣṇa. Añgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛttimanti.
So actually everything is that same Kṛṣṇa. In the Bhagavad-gītā it further explains, aham... What is that? Mayā tatam idam. Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. Sarvam, everything. Everything is expanded. Mayā tatam idam. Tatam means expanded; idam, this universe or this world or everything, whatever you take... Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4). He... That is His avyakta, impersonal form. Everything is Kṛṣṇa, but that does not mean that His personal form is finished. Because He is expanded everywhere... This is Māyāvāda theory, that "Because God has expanded in so many varieties, therefore God has no form." No. That is not the fact. Fact is, goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūtaḥ (Bs. 5.37). He is... In His original sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1) He is existing always in Goloka Vṛn... He does not go anywhere, leaving aside His friends, father, mother, beloved, anywhere. He's always... Vṛndāvanaṁ parityajya padam ekaṁ na gacchati. He does not go anywhere. Padam ekaṁ na gacchati. Just like a big man.
So dadarśa means "he saw." This seeing, this is impersonal seeing how the Supreme Personality of Godhead is present in everything. Although he is born directly from the Supreme Lord, Viṣṇu, still, he could not see the Lord. Sa tv ātma-yonir ativismita. Suppose all of a sudden you are sleeping and you are put into a place where nobody else there—you are simply there and everything, it is dark. How much perplexed you would be. So the Brahmā's position was like that. After each millennium, Brahmā's death, and then again birth... Our birth and death is going on, the same process. We are in the womb of the mother, and all of a sudden we come out, we see light, began to cry, and the relatives take care of us and we forget everything, in how much precarious condition I was before my birth.
So in the spiritual world, it is not void, not impersonal; it has everything exactly like this. There are (indistinct), trees, houses, everything. Cintāmaṇi-prakara-sadmasu kalpa-vṛkṣa-lakṣāvṛteṣu surabhīr abhipālayantam (Bs. 5.29). Surabhīr abhipālayantam. Prakara-sadmasu kalpa-vṛkṣa. This kalpa-vṛkṣa, there is tree, but it is not like this tree. A different, kalpa-vṛkṣa. From this tree, whatever you want you can get. That is called kalpa-vṛkṣa. In the material world, because it is covered by the three guṇas, you can get the mango from the mango tree and the orange from the orange tree, not that any tree you have grown you get both the mango and the orange, that is not. That is there in the spiritual world. Just like if I ask you, "Please bring me a glass of water," you can give me. If I ask you, "Please bring me this little (indistinct)," you can give me. That means because you are spirit soul, whatever I ask from you, you can give me. Spirit soul. Whatever I order, you can supply because you are spirit soul.
In the material world, because it is covered by the three guṇas, you can get the mango from the mango tree and the orange from the orange tree, not that any tree you have grown you get both the mango and the orange, that is not. That is there in the spiritual world. Just like if I ask you, "Please bring me a glass of water," you can give me. If I ask you, "Please bring me this little (indistinct)," you can give me. That means because you are spirit soul, whatever I ask from you, you can give me. Spirit soul. Whatever I order, you can supply because you are spirit soul. So the spiritual platform, you can get everything whatever you want. So there is no need of working for something. As soon as you desire, the things are there. That is called nirguṇa. Nirguṇa does not mean it is zero. That is the Māyāvādī philosophy. They have no conception of the nirguṇa. Nirguṇa (Sanskrit), it is described in the Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa is always nirguṇa. He is not within anything of this material world. But fools and rascals, they cannot understand. They say that God is impersonal; when He comes He takes the help of material energy and gets a body, material body. This is their philosophy. No. Kṛṣṇa says that "I appear...," sa guṇān ātma-māyayā.
| Page Title: | Impersonal (Lectures, SB) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 25 of Mar, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=132, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 132 |