Now the purport is that Bhagavad-gītā is a treatise which is specially meant for the devotee of the Lord. There are three classes of transcendentalists, namely the jñānī, the yogī and the bhakta. Or the impersonalist or the meditator or the devotees. So here it is clearly mentioned, the Lord says to Arjuna that "I am speaking or I am making you the first man of the paramparā. Because the old paramparā or disciplic succession is now broken, therefore I wish to establish again another paramparā in the same line of thought as it was coming down from the sun-god to others. So you, you take it and you distribute it. Or the system, the yoga system of Bhagavad-gītā may now be distributed through you. You become the authority of understanding Bhagavad-gītā." Now here is a direction that Bhagavad-gītā is especially instructed to Arjuna, the devotee of the Lord, the direct student of Kṛṣṇa. And not only that, he is intimately in touch with Kṛṣṇa as friend. Therefore Bhagavad-gītā is understood by a person who has similar qualities like Kṛṣṇa.
Impersonalist (Lectures, BG)
Expressions researched:
"impersonalist"
|"impersonalist's"
|"impersonalistic"
|"impersonalists"
|"impersonality"
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
So far India's authoritative persons are concerned, there is no two opinions, that Kṛṣṇa is not God. Both of them accept Kṛṣṇa the Supreme Personality. So far we are concerned, Vaiṣṇavas, we accept. There is no doubt about it. There are four different parties of Vaiṣṇavas. All of them accept Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There are eight commentaries on the very authoritative, very large commentaries on the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam of these Vaiṣṇavas, and all of them accept Kṛṣṇa. So far the other party is concerned, the impersonalists led by Śaṅkarācārya, a great stalwart scholar, he also accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He says, sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa: "The concept of Personality of Godhead, here is Kṛṣṇa." And people may misunderstand; therefore he has specifically mentioned Kṛṣṇa who has appeared as the son of Devakī and Vasudeva. Particularly, just like when you have to put your identification, you have to give the, your father's name or your husband's name. Similarly, the same principle as Śaṅkarācārya has followed. He has said "Kṛṣṇa, the Kṛṣṇa who is, wh has appeared as the son of Devakī and Vasudeva." So there is no two opinions. No, "Or this Kṛṣṇa, maybe another Kṛṣṇa." No. So that is stated here. Yes. Kṛṣṇa is accepted the Supreme Personality of Godhead by all the followers of Vedas. That is a fact. Yes.
Devotee: "There are three kinds of transcendentalists: the yogi, the impersonalist and the bhakta, or devotee. Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna, 'I am making you the first man of disciplic succession. The old succession is broken. I wish to reestablish the line of teaching which was passed down from the sun-god. So you become the authority of the Bhagavad-gītā.' The Bhagavad-gītā is directed to the devotee of the Lord who is directly in touch with the Lord as a friend. To learn the Bhagavad-gītā one should be like Arjuna, a devotee having a direct relationship with the Lord. This is more helpful than yoga or impersonal philosophical speculation. A devotee can be in relationship with the Lord in five different ways. He may have passive..., have a passive relationship..."
Prabhupāda: Now here is explained who is a devotee. That is explained. Yes.
Devotee: "He may have a passive relationship, he may have an active relationship. Three, he may be in friendship. Four, he may have the relationship of a parent. And five, he may have the relationship of conjugal lover of the Lord. Arjuna was a devotee in relationship..."
Prabhupāda: The passive relationship is simply realizing, "Oh, how God is great". God is great. One is thunderstruck with the greatness of God. That is passive relationship: "God, God is great." When that relationship is enhanced a little, more the next stage is that "If God is great why not give Him some service?" just like we are accustomed to give some service to some person who is greater than me. That is the laws of nature. Just like the animals.
The Māyāvādīs, there are two kinds of Māyāvādīs: the impersonalists and the voidists. They are all Māyāvādī. So their philosophy is good so far, because a foolish man cannot understand more than this. A foolish man, if he is informed that there is better life in the spiritual world, to become servant of God, Kṛṣṇa, they think, "I became servant of this material world. I have suffered so much. Again servant of Kṛṣṇa? Oh..." They shudder, "Oh, no, no. This is not good. This is not good." As soon as they hear of service, they think of this service, this nonsense service. They cannot think of that there is service, but there is simply ānanda. One is still more eager to serve Him, Kṛṣṇa. That is spiritual world. That they cannot understand. So these nirviśeṣavādī, impersonalists, they think like that. Just like a diseased man lying on the bed, and if he is informed that "When you will be cured, you will be able to eat nicely, you will be able to walk," he thinks that "Again walking? Again eating?" Because he is accustomed to eat bitter medicine and sāgudānā, not very palatable, and so many things, passing stool and urine, activities on the bed. So as soon as they inform that "After being cured there is also passing of stool and urine and eating, but that is very palatable," he cannot understand. He says, "It is something like this."
So the Māyāvādī impersonalists, they cannot understand that serving Kṛṣṇa is simply pleasure and blissful. They cannot understand. Therefore they become impersonalists: "No. The Absolute Truth cannot be person." That is another side of the Buddha philosophy. Impersonal means zero. That is also zero. So Buddhist philosophy, they also make the ultimate goal zero, and these Māyāvādīs, they also make the ultimate goal... Na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇum (SB 7.5.31). They do not understand that there is life, blissful life, by serving Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, here Arjuna is playing just like ordinary man. So he says to Kṛṣṇa, "You wanted me to fight, to become happy, to get the kingdom, but by killing my own men? Oh, nimittāni viparītāni. You are misleading me." Nimittāni ca paśyāmi viparītāni. "I'll not be happy by killing my own men. That is not possible. How You are inducing me?" So he said, nimittāni ca viparītāni paśyāmi. "No, no." Na ca śaknomy avasthātum: "I cannot stand here. Let me go back. Take my chariot back. I'll not stay here." Na ca śaknomy avasthātuṁ bhramatīva ca me manaḥ (BG 1.30). "I am becoming bewildered. I am puzzled now."
So in India also there is a class. In Asamsaye, they eat also dog. So the dog-eaters, they are considered lowest of the mankind. Śva-pacaḥ. Śva means dog and pacaḥ means who cooks. Śva-pacaḥ means caṇḍāla. If a man from the śva-pacaḥ family, or the caṇḍāla family, he becomes a Vaiṣṇava, strictly according to the orders, then he can become guru, but not a brāhmaṇa if he's not a Vaiṣṇava. This is the stricture. Even one is born in the family of a brāhmaṇa, and he's not only born, he's qualified, sat-karma-nipuṇo... Nipuṇo means qualified. Brāhmaṇa has got six kinds of occupation. He must be learned himself, he must be able to teach others Vedic literatures. That is called paṭhana pāṭhana. Then he must worship... Worship means demigods. Or they consider that any demigod or God, the same, some impersonalists. So yajana, yājana. There are other also, religious ritual functions. They perform. That is called yajana. Yajana yājana. And dāna pratigṛha. A brāhmaṇa takes contribution. A brāhmaṇa is never engaged in service like śūdra. That is śūdra's business.
So Arjuna said that sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi keśava (BG 10.14). "My dear Kṛṣṇa, whatever You are saying, I accept in toto," in the Tenth Chapter. Just like Dr. Radhakrishnan says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa, it is something else." He does not accept in that way. He says that "Whatever You are saying, I accept it. You are saying that You are the Supreme, I accept it. I don't say that You have got a separate thing within. That is Supreme, You are not Supreme, as person." This is impersonalist. They do not know that Kṛṣṇa has no such... A conditioned soul... Just like we are, I am different from my soul. "I am" means my body, or I am soul, different from the body. So Kṛṣṇa has no such differentiation. He does not know that. Because he's not following Kṛṣṇa, the perfect spiritual master. He's following some rascal spiritual master. Therefore he has this mistake. But if we follow Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa, then we get the perfect knowledge. We may not be cent percent perfect, but as far as possible, if we follow the instruction as it is, that much perfect. In this way one will get perfection.
So here, bhagavān uvāca. Vyāsadeva does not say that kṛṣṇa uvāca. If, if he would have said, "Kṛṣṇa," then people would have misunderstood. He's directly speaking, bhagavān uvāca, "the Supreme Personality of Godhead." So anyone who is impersonalist, how he can understand Bhagavad-gītā? Bhagavān means person. Bhagavān is not imperson. The Absolute Truth is manifested in three features: Brahman, Paramātmā, Bhagavān. Brahman is the beginning, impersonal. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Because... Just like fire. Fire is burning somewhere, but its heat and light is impersonal. Suppose here is big fire. Just like we got fireplace. That is in one corner. But the whole room you are feeling heat. That heat is impersonal. But the fireplace, where there is blazing fire, that is personal. So impersonal conception is the offshoot of the person. That will be explained in the Thirteenth Chapter: mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam (BG 9.4). Kṛṣṇa says that "Everyone, everywhere I am spread. I exist everywhere." How does He exist? By His energy.
If you take a drop of sea water, the quality, the chemical composition is the same. But the quantity is different. It is a drop, and the sea is vast ocean. Similarly, we are exactly of the same quality as Kṛṣṇa. We can study. Why people say God is impersonal? If I am of the same quality, so God is also person, how He can be imperson? If, qualitatively, we are one, then as I feel individually, so why God should be refused individuality? This is another nonsense. The impersonalist rascals, they cannot understand what is the nature of God. In the Bible also it is said: "Man is made after God." You can study God's quality by studying your quality, or anyone's quality. Simply the difference is quantity's different. I have got some quality, some productive capacity. We also produce, every individual soul is producing something. But his production cannot be compared with production of God. That is the difference. We are producing one flying machine. We are taking very much pride that: "Now we have discovered the sputnik. It is going to the moon planet." But that is not perfect. It is coming back. But God has produced so many flying planets, millions and trillions of planets, very, very heavy planets. Just like this planet is carrying so many big, big mountains, sea, but still it is flying. It is floating in the air just like a cotton swab. This is God's power. Gām āviśya (BG 15.13). In the Bhagavad-gītā, you'll find: ahaṁ dhārayāmy ojasā. Who is sustaining all these big, big planets? We are explaining gravity. And in the śāstra we find that it is being carried by Saṅkarṣaṇa.
So originally we are all persons, no imperson. Kṛṣṇa also says... He'll say that: "These soldiers, these kings, you and Me, My dear Arjuna, it is not that we did not exist in the past. Neither it is that in future we shall cease to exist." So this particular instruction of Kṛṣṇa, that: "I, You and all these kings and soldiers who have assembled here, they existed. As we are existing now, individual persons; similarly, they existed, individual persons. And in future also we shall exist as individual persons." So where is the question of imperson? These nonsense impersonalists, voidists. Therefore, the principle is to understand things in reality one has to approach Kṛṣṇa as Arjuna has approached, śiṣyas te 'ham: (BG 2.7) "Now I am Your disciple. You just teach me. Śādhi māṁ prapannam. I am surrendering. I am not trying to talk with You on equal level."
So the spiritual master, even if you take that he is conditioned soul, but he does not speak anything from his own side. He speaks from Kṛṣṇa's side. So unless... The Vedic principle is that unless one is not liberated from the material conditions, he cannot give us any perfect knowledge. The conditioned soul, however he may be academically advanced, educated, he cannot give us any perfect knowledge. Only one who is above the condition of these material laws, he can give us the perfect knowledge. Similarly Śaṅkarācārya, he's also impersonalist, but he accepts Kṛṣṇa the supreme authority. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa. "Kṛṣṇa is that Supreme Personality of Godhead." The modern Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not disclose this statement of Śaṅkarācārya. To cheat people. But Śaṅkarācārya's statement is there. We can give evidence. He accepts Kṛṣṇa as the supreme authority.
So here is an authority, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Authority. His authority, authorityship, is accepted by all over the world. In, in our India there are five different disciplic succession of authorities, just like the Śaṅkarites, followers of Śaṅkarācārya, and Vaiṣṇavites. Generally, they are two: Māyāvādī, impersonalists; and personalists. The personalist school, philosophers, they are divided into four: Rāmānuja-sampradāya—that means followers of Ācārya Rāmānuja; Madhvācārya-sampradāya, or the followers of Madhvācārya; Nimbārka-sampradāya, followers of Nimbārka Ācārya; and Viṣṇu Svāmī-sampradāya. They, their conclusion is the same. Although they are four in number, their conclusion is the same. And another sect is Śaṅkarite sampradāya. So all these four, I mean, five different section of the Hindus, they accept Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All of them. There is no denial. Although they are five, they have got different theses and philosophies, little, little difference, not, I mean, conclusion, but still... Now, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, he, he is supposed, he is considered to be impersonalist. Impersonalist means he does not believe in the personal form of God. But still, he has commented in this, of this Bhagavad-gītā, Śaṅkara-bhāṣya. He has admitted there that "Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the Personality of Godhead." He has also admitted. Others, they are Vaiṣṇavites, other ācāryas, other authorities, they are Vaiṣṇavites. They have naturally admitted because they believe from the beginning. But even Śaṅkarācārya, who is impersonalist, he has also clearly written that sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ: "Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead." And there are many evidences in many scriptures and Vedic scriptures that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Madhudviṣa: "Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent there is no endurance and of the eternal there is no cessation. Seers have concluded this by studying the nature of both." Purport: "There is no endurance of the changing body. That the body is changing every moment by the actions and reactions of different cells is admitted by modern medical science, and thus growth and old age are taking place. But the spiritual soul exists permanently, remaining the same in all changing circumstances of the body and mind. That is the difference between matter and spirit. By nature the body is ever-changing and the soul is eternal. This conclusion is established by all classes of seers of the truth, impersonalists and personalists."
Prabhupāda: This is... So far the constitution of the spirit is concerned, it is eternal. That is accepted by all philosophers, personalists and impersonalists. The only difference is that the impersonalist says that after liberation, after getting freed from this bodily contamination, the spirit soul mixes with the Supreme Soul, all-pervading, without any individual existence. Just like the same example, that the small sky within the pitcher. When the pitcher is broken, the small sky within the pitcher mixes with the big sky. The Vaiṣṇava philosopher says that the small sky is individual. It mixes with the big sky, but it keeps its individuality. The example is given in this connection: just like a green bird entering a green tree. So when the bird enters the tree, nobody can find out where is the bird because the leaves of the tree are green and the bird is also green. Nobody can trace out. But that does not mean the bird has lost its individuality.
So is any one of us the highest authority? No. Nobody is highest authority. Everyone is under the grip of material nature. How you can be highest authority? But they imagine, "Yes, I am high authority. I am..." Meditate: "I am the highest authority, I am moving the sun, I am moving the this," simply rascaldom. This is their meditation. Falsely think that "I am the supreme, I am controlling everything. The sun is moving under my direction, the everything, the water is, seas, I mean to say, there under my direction." Simply... This is their meditation. Impersonalists. Just try to understand how much foolish they are. Any sane man will say that "I am moving the sun, I am moving the moon, I am moving the sea"? Any sane man will say like that? Nobody will say. Will you say? Anyone here? That you are moving the sun, you are moving the moon? Who is there, anyone? Who can say? Nobody can say. And still these rascals they are claiming that he has become God. God... "We are all God."
Viṣṇujana: "The Supreme Soul is infinite and the atomic soul is infinitesimal. Therefore the infinitesimal soul being unchangeable can never become equal to the infinite soul."
Prabhupāda: Yes. This is a common sense argument. How it can be? If it is equal to the infinite, how he has become finite? They cannot answer. The impersonalists cannot answer. How he has become finite? They'll simply answer, "It is māyā." Then māyā is greater than the infinite? Then māyā becomes greater than the infinite. Then that God is no more infinite because māyā covers the Supreme, so how He is infinite? He becomes finite? The common sense is that finite Brahman is covered by māyā. Not the infinite. Therefore duality. Finite and infinite living entities. Kṛṣṇa is infinite, and the ordinary living entities are finite. (sound of bells from ice cream truck) What is that? (music of ice cream truck)
Viṣṇujana: Ice cream truck.
Prabhupāda: Oh, ice cream. (laughter) You are taking ice cream? Huh?
Viṣṇujana: No. They go up and down the street.
Prabhupāda: Canvassing?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Yes.
If you remain nondevotee, you cannot convince others. That is not in your power. Therefore the nondevotee class of men, they cannot understand God, they cannot convince others about God. That's a fact. They'll simply present hodge-podge thing, they do not understand clearly, and they present hodge-podge. That's all. Without being... Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ (BG 18.55). "If anyone wants to understand Me as I am..." Of course, nobody can understand Kṛṣṇa as He is, still, as far as possible. That is only through bhakti. Bhaktyā, it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. It doesn't say that through knowledge, philosophical speculation or through haṭha-yoga system. No. He says bhaktyā, clearly. And in the beginning also He says, "Because you are My bhakta, therefore I shall reveal to you." The whole science is for the devotee. Not for anyone else. Those who are not devotees, their understanding of God is blocked forever. They cannot understand. It is a fact. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, māyāvādī-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). If anyone tries to understand these impersonalist Māyāvādī philosophers, then his, I mean to say, progress is blocked for good. Not for good, of course. Nothing can be for good. But for the present at least his progress is blocked. Sarva-nāśa. Chant. Hare Kṛṣṇa. (kīrtana) (end)
Somebody is serving as friend. Somebody is serving as father and mother. Somebody is serving as conjugal lover. These are five primary mellows in which a devotee is connected with Kṛṣṇa. And there are other, seven rasas also. They are not primary; secondary. Somebody is serving Kṛṣṇa as enemy. Just like the asuras. They also serve Kṛṣṇa—as enemy. Somebody is serving, giving pleasure to Kṛṣṇa, by fighting with Him. So there are so many, twelve rasas. Akhila-rasāmṛta-sindhu. All the rasas that we have got experience within this world, they are coming from Kṛṣṇa. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). The Vedānta-sūtra says, "Everything, whatever we see within our experience, we cannot experience anything if it is not in Kṛṣṇa." That is Kṛṣṇa. He was stealing, which we consider not very good business. That stealing is also in Kṛṣṇa. He's, He's famous as Mākhana-cora, the stealer of butter. So this is Kṛṣṇa. So everything is there. Whatever our dealings in this material world we find, that is only perverted reflection of our dealing with Kṛṣṇa in the spiritual world. But those who are unaware of the spiritual world, impersonalists, they have no information that Kṛṣṇa is always busy. Jaya rādhā-mādhava kuñja-bihārī. He's always busy. He's person. But He is simply dear to the gopījana. Gopījana-vallabha. He wants to please the gopījanas. The gopīs, the cowherd boys and the gopīs, constant companion of Kṛṣṇa.
Now people may say that Arjuna was Kṛṣṇa's friend. To satisfy his friend, he has accepted Him as paraṁ brahma. But that is not the fact. Arjuna gives evidences that "Not only I, but the great authorities like Vyāsa, Nārada, Asita, Devala, they have also accepted You as the Supreme Personality of Godhead." In the recent ages... This is five thousand years ago. Even one thousand, five hundred... Śaṅkarācārya, who is impersonalist, he has also accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa. He has written in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā: nārāyaṇaḥ avyakta, avyaktāt, para avyaktāt. Nārāyaṇaḥ para avyaktāt. "Nārāyaṇa is not a creation of this material world. He's transcendental." He has accepted. And what to speak of the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, all. They have written so many nice commentaries on the Bhagavad-gītā, Brahma-sūtra, establishing that the Supreme Absolute Truth is person, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Kṛṣṇa is speaking as person. And He is warning the rascals: avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). "Because I am speaking as a human being, the rascals, they deride." Paraṁ bhāvam ajānantaḥ. They do not know what is My influence, what is My power."
Just like we belong to the devotee group of philosophers. Then there are others who are impersonalists. But they, or both of them, they do not deny the presence of the soul, presence of the soul. The Buddha philosophy, they do not recognize the soul. They, according to them, that the combination of matter at a certain stage produces consciousness. But that philosophy, that argument, can be refuted that with matter, you cannot produce consciousness. Because... Take the example of a dead man. The dead man is there. All the elements, material elements, are all there present. But you cannot revise, you cannot revoke that man to consciousness. The elements are there, the ingredients are there. Now, if you think this ingredient has been decomposed or deteriorated, then replace that ingredient. Just like in a machine. In a machine some part is wear and tear. It is not working, stopped. You can replace that part into new part, and the machine will work. But this is not like that. If you think that something has deteriorated in this body, therefore it has become dead. Say, for example, that they say generally, due to heart failure. Now, heart... Medical practitioners they know it that heart is always pumping like this, pumping like this. Now, can you produce heart action by artificial pumping? No. It is not possible. They give respiratory oxygen gas and so many things, but it cannot be revived.
This is the prayer by Prahlāda Mahārāja. He says, "My dear Lord, lotus-eyed, Aravindākṣa," ye anye. "Some third-class men, they are very much proud of ending this material life, these nirvāṇa or these impersonalists." Vimukta-māninaḥ. Vimukta-māninaḥ means they are simply falsely thinking that they have surpassed the clutches of māyā. Falsely. Vimukta-māninaḥ. Just like if you falsely think that "I am the proprietor of this Los Angeles city," is it not your false thinking? Similarly, if anyone thinks that "Now I have attained nirvāṇa or I have merged into the Supreme." You may think like that. That māyā is very strong. You may be puffed up by such false prestige. Vimukta-māninaḥ. Bhāgavata says, tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). "But because they have not searched out Your lotus feet, therefore their consciousness is impure, thinking 'I am something.' " Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Purport: "A person who is fully Kṛṣṇa conscious and by his acts in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is fully satisfied, no longer has anything to perform as his duty. Due to his becoming Kṛṣṇa conscious all the dirty things within are instantly cleansed, ordinarily an effect of many, many thousands of yajña performances. By such clearing of consciousness one becomes fully confident of his eternal position in relationship with the Supreme. His duty thus becomes self-illuminated by the grace of the Lord and therefore he no longer has anything to do in terms of the Vedic injunctions. Such a Kṛṣṇa conscious person is no longer interested in material activities and no longer takes pleasure in material arrangements like wine, women and similar infatuations."
Eighteen: "A self-realized man has no purpose to fulfill in the discharge of his prescribed duties, nor has he any reason not to perform such work. Nor has he any need to depend on any other living being (BG 3.18)."
Nineteen: "Therefore without being attached to the fruits of activities, one should act as a matter of duty, for by working without attachment one attains the Supreme (BG 3.19)."
Purport: "This Supreme is the Personality of Godhead for the devotees and liberation for the impersonalist. A person acting for Kṛṣṇa or in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, under proper guidance and without attachment to the result of the work is certainly making progress towards the supreme goal of life. Indirectly Arjuna is told that he should fight the battle of Kurukṣetra without attachment in the interest of Kṛṣṇa because Kṛṣṇa wanted him to fight. To be a good man or a nonviolent man is also a personal attachment, but to act on behalf of the Supreme..."
Prabhupāda: Yes, to be good man, this consciousness is, "I am very good man." Or to bad man, "I am very bad man." But if you become Kṛṣṇa conscious, "I am neither good man or bad man. I am Kṛṣṇa's man." That's all. Finished. Finished. All business. "I am Kṛṣṇa's man." That's all. If Kṛṣṇa wants to kill you, I'll kill you. If Kṛṣṇa says you do that, I'll do that. That's all. So I am Kṛṣṇa's man. So he's immediately transcendental to all goodness or badness.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Therefore, without being attached to the fruits of activity, one should act as a matter of duty for by working without attachment one attains the Supreme (BG 3.18)."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Purport: "This Supreme is the Personality of Godhead for the devotees and liberation for the impersonalists."
Prabhupāda: Then what is that Supreme? The conception of Supreme... For the impersonalist, the impersonal Brahman effulgence is the Supreme. Just like light. When you come to the sunshine, that is light, but the devotees, they are not satisfied with the sunshine. They want to penetrate into the sun planet and see the sun-god. That is devotee's position. And one who cannot do so, he is satisfied with the sunshine. Everything is light. Sunshine is light, sun globe is light, and if you enter in the sun globe, there is also light.
So these are all spiritual position, impersonalist or personalist. But the impersonalist goal is partial because they are satisfied simply by seeing the light. And the devotees, they are not satisfied simply by seeing the light. They want to enter within the light to see wherefrom the light is coming. That is the difference between impersonalist and personalist. They are farther advanced.
Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). The Lord is full bliss, eternal knowledge. So the impersonalists they are satisfied with only knowledge, jñāna, light, that's all. Knowledge is light. But farther advanced, say, the yogis, they want to see the localized, just like the sun globe. And the devotees, they want to see the person who is predominating over the sun globe. This is a crude example.
So the goal, ultimate goal, it is described, "The Supreme is the Personality of Godhead for the devotee, and liberation for the impersonalist." The impersonalists, they simply want to be free from this material atmosphere and go to the spiritual atmosphere. Just like one who is in the darkness of a room, his aspiration is how to see light. That's all. The impersonalist means simply to see light, knowledge. And personalist means to direct, to be in direct touch with the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
So this is also very difficult to become brahma-bhūtaḥ. We are now jīva-bhūtaḥ. But people are not interested to become brahma-bhūtaḥ or devotee of Kṛṣṇa. They are interested to continue this material way of life, changing the body. They do not know. They think this body is all in all, but that is not the fact. That is the first instruction of Bhagavad-gītā, dehāntara-prāptiḥ (BG 2.13). You have to change your body, as you are already changing. These are stated there. So yatatām api siddhānāṁ kaścin māṁ vetti tattvataḥ (BG 7.3). Even those who are siddha... There are many big, big sannyāsīs, impersonalists. They cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. It is a fact. They consider Kṛṣṇa as ordinary human being. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ (BG 9.11). So it is very difficult to understand Kṛṣṇa. But if you want to understand Kṛṣṇa, try to understand Kṛṣṇa from Kṛṣṇa, not otherwise. Then you will understand Kṛṣṇa.
So when there is no these material impediments, naturally the life is eternal, the knowledge is eternal, the bliss is eternal. As soon as we are free from this material body, then these questions of past, present, future, pleasure, not pleasure, knowledge, no knowledge, these dualities, this world of duality will finish. The impersonalists, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that because the past, present, and future, and this duality is finished, therefore there is no variegatedness. They cannot understand. They cannot accommodate in their tiny brain that this is possible.
Similarly, when Kṛṣṇa comes, just like when a king goes somewhere, it does not mean he is going alone. He goes with all his paraphernalia, secretaries, minister, and commander-in-chief, and so many others. Similarly, whenever Kṛṣṇa comes, He does not come... Just like in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said, aham eva asam agre. "I was in the beginning." The impersonalists interpret that "I was, personally," but that is not the fact. Nārāyaṇa, as soon as Nārāyaṇa was means Nārāyaṇa was there with... Not was there, Nārāyaṇa is there always with His all paraphernalia. And that is explained in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, dhāmnā svena nirasta-kuhakaṁ sadā paraṁ satyaṁ dhīmahi. Dhāmnā svena nirasta-kuhakam. The kingdom of God is freed from illusion. This world, this material world, is full of illusion. But dhāmnā svena nirasta-kuhakam. So God's kingdom, or Kṛṣṇa's kingdom, is spiritual. Everything will be explained one after another.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Purport: "The Lord's descent from His transcendental abode is already explained in the sixth verse. One who can understand the truth of the appearance of the Personality of Godhead is already liberated from material bondage, and therefore he returns to the kingdom of God immediately after quitting his present material body. Such liberation of the living entity from material bondage is not at all easy. The impersonalist and the yogi attain liberation only after much trouble and many, many births. Even then their liberation is..."
Prabhupāda: Try to understand bondage, what is bondage. We are thinking we are very, we are free. We are declaring that "We belong to the free nation" or "free community," or everyone is seeking after freedom. But nobody is free. Nobody is free. Everyone is under the stringent laws of nature. So bondage means to remain under the condition of material laws. That is called bondage.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "The impersonalists and the yogis attain liberation only after much trouble and many, many births. Even then the liberation they achieve, merging into the impersonal Brahmajyoti effulgence of the Lord, is only partial, and there is a risk of returning again to this material world. But the devotee, simply by understanding the transcendental nature of the body and the activities of the Lord, attains the abode of the Lord after ending this body and does not run the risk of returning again to this material world. In the Brahma-saṁhitā it is stated that the Lord has many, many forms and incarnations. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Although there are many transcendental forms of the Lord, they are still one and the same Supreme Personality of Godhead. One has to understand this fact with conviction although it is incomprehensible to mundane scholars and empiric philosophers. As stated in the Vedas: eko devo nitya-līlānurakto bhakta-vyāpī hṛdy antarātmā: 'The one Supreme Personality of Godhead is eternally engaged in many many transcendental forms in relationships with His unalloyed devotees.' This Vedic version is confirmed in this verse of the Bhagavad-gītā personally by the Lord. Anyone who accepts this truth on the strength of the authority of the Vedas and of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and who does not waste time in philosophical speculation obtains the highest perfectional stage of liberation."
Prabhupāda: Yes. This is very important point. The process of understanding knowledge. The modern tendency is to understand by dint of one's sense perception. That is not possible. There are many things, especially spiritual matters; nobody can understand by simple speculation. So one has to accept the authority. So according to Vedic culture, the Vedas are the authority. If there is some information in the Vedas, you accept it, authority. That is very nice system.
Just like the example is given... I have several times..., that the impersonalists, they describe this world as false, as false. But simply describing this world as false is not sufficient. What is the reality we must know. The... Generally the example is cited that in the darkness when you see a curling rope, you misunderstand it that it is a snake. But actually it is not the snake. Now, this conception of a snake comes wherefrom? Unless there is a real snake, how you can see that it is a snake? That rope is false. That's all right. That rope is not snake, but there is real snake. Otherwise, how you get the conception of the snake? Just try to follow it. Without having the real snake, you cannot get this conception of snake.
Kṛṣṇa says, vīta-rāga. Vīta-rāga. Vīta means one who has been able to give up this attachment. Rāga means the attachment of this material world. And bhaya, one who has developed this transcendental sense... The impersonalists, their philosophy is that they want to merge into the impersonal existence of the Absolute Truth. They are afraid of the life of variegatedness. Because they have got a very bitter experience of this life of variegatedness, therefore they want to make a negation of this variegatedness and they want to turn themselves into the impersonal feature. So these things are there. So vīta-rāga. So one has to give up this attachment and detachment also. Vīta-rāga-bhaya and krodha.
Krodha means there are other persons who are neither impersonalists nor personalists. They are what are called more or less atheists. Atheist means they don't believe in any transcendental nature. Even they do not believe in the existence of the soul. They simply concern themselves with this material body. Just like Buddha philosophy. Buddha philosophy does not accept the existence of the soul. Buddha philosophy says that this material body is a combination of matter. Now, as soon as the matter is dissolved, then the feelings of happiness and distress is gone. But according to Bhagavad-gītā, the existence of soul is accepted in the Vedic literature.
Now Kṛṣṇa says... There are three kinds of transcendentalists. What are they? The impersonalist and the localized yogi and the devotees. There are three kinds of transcendentalists. What are the impersonalists? Impersonalists means this jñānī, those who are trying to understand what is Brahman and try to negativating this material world, neti neti: "This is not Brahman. Brahman is separate from this matter." They are called jñānīs. And there are yogis. Yogi means those who are trying to focus all attention to the Supersoul which is within our heart. That is called yoga system. And yogi, jñānī, and bhakta, devotees. Those who are focusing all their concentration on the Supreme Personality of Godhead Kṛṣṇa. So these three are classes of... They are all transcendentalists.
Anywhere, any, I mean to say, person who is interested in the transcendental feature of the Absolute Truth, they must be either these impersonalists or the localized or must be devotee of the Lord. So these three features are there, presented of Kṛṣṇa conception, and how they are conceived and what are the different results, we shall try to explain in the next meeting. Now you can put your questions. (break)
They have to take shelter of the Vedas. Just like Śaṅkarācārya. Śaṅkarācārya is impersonalist, and we, the Vaiṣṇavas... There are two classes of philosopher in India. One is impersonalist and the other is personalist. So we, so far we are concerned, we are personalist, and Śaṅkarācārya is impersonalist. Now, although we are two classes, impersonalist and personalist, we take Veda as the medium of knowledge. We may give different interpretations. That is another thing. But either party of Śaṅkarācārya or the party of Vaiṣṇava and ācāryas, they take the Vedānta-sūtra, the Vedānta philosophy, as the medium.
But practically, Kṛṣṇa, so far those who are transcendentalists, they want to be controlled by three phases of Kṛṣṇa: Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān. Those who are impersonalists, they want to be merged into the Brahman effulgence. That is also acceptance of being controlled.
Just like if you merge into the ocean... They give this example, generally. So they think that by merging, by dipping into the ocean, they become also ocean. That is not possible. You become controlled by the ocean. Suppose you dip, you dive into the ocean. Does it mean that you become ocean? You become controlled by the ocean. They are under the impression that "I am now a small drop. So if I merge into the ocean, the Brahman, then I'll become Brahman." Is that a very reasonable proposal? You are a drop of water. Scientifically, what is said? Suppose a drop of water is mixed in with the sea water, does it mean the drop becomes sea? What is your scientific explanation? It is also... Eh?
Now, suppose there are impersonalists who believe in the ultimate, I mean to say, merging into the supreme effulgence, brahma-jyotir. And what is that brahma-jyotir? Brahmajyoti is just the atomic spiritual combination of atomic spiritual portions. That is brahma-jyotir. Just like the sun rays. Those who are scientists, those who know what is the sun ray... The sun ray is a small molecular, glazing atom, the sun ray. You have got experience of sun ray, but what is the sun ray? It is not homogeneous. It is heterogeneous. When you can analyze the sun ray, you'll find small particles of molecules. Similarly, brahma-jyotir is also spiritual atoms combined together. Just like the sun rays, different material molecules combined together, similarly, brahma-jyotir is also like that. Now as in the sun rays there are different planets—they are also generated from the sun rays—similarly, from the brahma-jyotir there are different planets, but those planets we cannot see here. That is beyond this sky. So in that planets, spiritual planets, there are different forms of God, Kṛṣṇa. That is described in the Brahma-saṁhitā.
Prabhupāda: It (the microphone) is not fixed up right.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "But Kṛṣṇa is only fully realized by His pure devotees. Therefore, Kṛṣṇa is the object of everyone's realization, and as such anyone and everyone is satisfied according to one's desire to have Him. One devotee may want Kṛṣṇa as the supreme master, another as his personal friend, another as his son, and still another as his lover. Kṛṣṇa rewards equally all the devotees in their different intensities of love for Him. In the material world the same reciprocations of feelings are there and they are equally exchanged by the Lord with the different types of worshipers. The pure devotees both here and in the transcendental abode associate with Him in person and are able to render personal service to the Lord and thus derive transcendental bliss in His loving service. As for those who are impersonalists and who want to commit spiritual suicide by annihilating the individual existence of the living entity, Kṛṣṇa helps them also by absorbing them into His effulgence. Such impersonalists do not agree to accept the eternal, blissful Personality of Godhead, and consequently they cannot relish the bliss of transcendental personal service to the Lord..."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "...and they extinguish their individuality."
Prabhupāda: God realization, there are three aspects: brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). The Absolute Truth is realized in three aspects—Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. Brahman, the impersonal conception of the absolute truth, that is called Brahman. And Paramātmā is localized aspect of the Absolute Truth. And Bhagavān is the ultimate realization, Personality of Godhead.
The example, another example. Just like from a very distant place you see one hill. You will find just like it is a cloud. If you go further near you will see it is something green. And if you reach the mountain then you will see there are so many trees, so many animals, houses and living beings. The same example can be given here. One who is observing the absolute truth from a very distant place, their conception is impersonal. One who is further advanced, their conception is localized. God is situated in everyone's heart. That is localized.
Therefore Kṛṣṇa says that "My way is followed by everyone." The impersonalists, they are also aiming to the same goal and the yogis or the localized realizer they are also aiming the same goal. But the devotees, they have reached the same goal. That is the difference. The impersonalists or the yogis, they could not reach the final goal. But the devotees, they have reached the final goal. Therefore you will find in the Bhagavad-gītā the Lord says, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). After many, many births of transcendental realization one surrenders unto Me accepting vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti (BG 7.19), Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa, is everything. Sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ. That sort of mahātmā, great soul, is very rare.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Such impersonalists do not agree to accept the eternal, blissful Personality of Godhead and consequently they cannot relish the bliss of transcendental personal service to the Lord, having extinguished their individuality. Some of them who are not situated even in the impersonal existence return to this material field to exhibit their dormant desires for activities. They are not admitted into the spiritual planets but they again are given a chance to act on the material planets. For those who are fruitive workers the Lord awards the desired results of their prescribed duties as the yajñeśvara; and those who are yogis seeking mystic powers are awarded such powers. In other words, everyone is dependent for success upon His mercy alone and all kinds of spiritual processes are but different degrees of success on the same path. Unless, therefore, one comes to the highest perfection of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, all attempts remain imperfect, as is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: 'Whether one is without desire (the condition of the devotees) or is desirous of all fruitive results, or is after liberation, one should with all efforts try to worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead for complete perfection culminating in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.' "
Prabhupāda: Yes. This verse refers to the statement of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam wherein it is stated that
- akāmaḥ sarva-kāmo vā
- mokṣa-kāma udāra-dhīḥ
- tīvreṇa bhakti-yogena
- yajeta puruṣaṁ param
- (SB 2.3.10)
The idea is that there are three class of men. One class of men they are simply desiring material comforts, desiring. They want nice house, nice wife, nice comfortable life, everything nice for the comfort of this body. They are called sarva-kāma. Sarva-kāma means their desire has no end.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Akarma means without reaction to work. The impersonalist ceases fruitive activities out of fear so that the resultant action may not be a stumbling block on the path of self-realization whereas the personalist knows rightly his position as the eternal servitor of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore he engages himself in the activities of Kṛṣṇa consciousness because everything is done for Kṛṣṇa he enjoys only transcendental happiness in the discharge of his service. Those who are engaged in this process or without desire for personal sense gratification, the sense of eternal servitorship to Kṛṣṇa makes one immune to all reactionary elements of work."
Prabhupāda: That's all. Now any question? Yes?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Can you explain, Prabhupāda, once again what action in action and inaction in action?
Prabhupāda: Action, just like you are active. You are working, you all Kṛṣṇa conscious devotees, you are also working. You are not sitting idly, but it is inaction. Inaction in this sense that it is not producing any reaction. It has no reaction. But others, those who are not acting in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they are also busy but they are producing their reaction. So things which are not producing reaction, that is inaction. One who can see that "I am acting in this way, there is no reaction," that is inaction. And one who sees that "I am doing this but there is reaction," that is action. So it requires little intelligence to see how it is action or inaction. Therefore it is said that one who can see action in inaction and inaction in action, he is intelligent.
Devotee: "All the different varieties of sacrifice can be placed within two primary divisions: sacrifice of worldly possessions and sacrifice in pursuit of transcendental knowledge. Those who are in Kṛṣṇa consciousness sacrifice all material possessions for the satisfaction of the Supreme Lord, while others, who want some temporary material happiness sacrifice their material possessions to satisfy demigods such as Indra, the sun, etc. And others who are impersonalists sacrifice in the sense of merging into the existence of impersonal Brahman. The demigods are powerful living entities appointed by the Supreme Lord for the maintenance and supervision of all material functions like heating, watering, and lighting of the universe. Those who are interested in such supplies of material benefits worship the demigods by various sacrifices according to the Vedic rituals. They are called bahv-īśvara-vādī, or believers in many gods."
Prabhupāda: Bahv-īśvara-vādī. Bahv-īśvara-vādī means believing in many gods. Actually God is one but His servants who are known as demigods. So less intelligent class of men they accept demigods as God. Just like a less intelligent class of men takes a police constable, he raises his hand like this and the car is stopped even it belong to a great rich man. So his child may think that "This constable is very great man. You see. He is very important man." But the father knows he is nothing. Similarly, those who are interested in demigods they are like children. "Oh, this constable is very important." You see. "Because by his hand my father had to stop my car." You see.
Devotee: "Whereas others who stick to the impersonal feature of the Absolute Truth and regard the forms of the demigods as temporary sacrifice their individual selves in the supreme fire and thus end their individual existences by merging into the existence of the Supreme. Such impersonalists relinquish their time in philosophical speculation for understanding the transcendental nature of the Supreme. In other words, the fruitive workers sacrifice their material possessions for material enjoyments whereas the impersonalist sacrifices his material designations with a view to merging into the existence of the Supreme. For the impersonalist the fire, altar, and the sacrifice is the Supreme Brahman and the offering is the self being consumed by the fire of Brahman. The Kṛṣṇa conscious person, however, sacrifices everything for the satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa and as such all his material possessions as well as his own self, everything, are sacrificed for Kṛṣṇa as with Arjuna. Thus he is the first-class yogi for he does not lose his individual existence."
Prabhupāda: That's it. Question? Yes?
Devotee: (indistinct) eternally individual, so how do the impersonalists (?) attaining their goal merge into the impersonal brahma-jyotir?
Prabhupāda: That is their sign of less intelligence. Therefore we call the impersonalist as less intelligent. Just like the same example, the child is thinking that the constable is very important man. Similarly, the impersonalists are less intelligent in this sense, that what is this brahma-jyotir? The brahma-jyotir is combination of atomic spiritual sparks. Just like sunshine is combination of molecular shining particles. This is scientific. Anything you take, either take sunshine or fire or water, you'll find atomic, even earth, they are all atomic, small, very small parts. Similarly, the brahma-jyotir is combination of the atomic spiritual sparks who are individual living entities.
Just like a child. When there is something fearful the child, it is nature, closes the eyes. I have practical experience. When I was young man I went to the zoo with my little son and as soon as there was a tiger cage, oh, the child closed the eyes. Yes. He could not bear the vicious sight. This is natural.
Similarly, these impersonalists they are closing their eyes. That's all. Just like voidists, they are also doing that. "Now I have become free by smoking or by gāñjā eating, drinking, or smoking." You see? These things are simply false imagination. Therefore they are less intelligent. They are not intelligent. Bhāgavata says ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. They are self-complacent that "I have become free, liberated," this and that. But actually their intelligence is very contaminated.
So if we understand Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's energies, then we can realize the Vedic slogan, sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. But without understanding Kṛṣṇa, it is not possible. Without understanding Kṛṣṇa, there will be falldown. Therefore we see so many impersonalists. They cannot give up their attachment for this material world. That is not possible.
That is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "Anyone who has neglected Your personality," aravindākṣa, "O the lotus-eyed Kṛṣṇa," aravindākṣe, ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa tvayy asta-bhāvāt, "they cannot understand what You are." Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ: "Their intelligence is still contaminated, not purified." Aviśuddha. Then what is the result? The result is āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "After severe austerities, penances, they may come to the impersonal understanding of Your brahma-jyotir, but patanty adhaḥ, again comes to the material world."
Therefore the impersonalists, without understanding of Kṛṣṇa, even very much advanced, they do not get any occupation. They again come down to the material platform to open hospital, school, college. Why? Because the impersonalist says that this material world is false. If the material world is false, why you come down again to the false platform to open schools and hospitals? That means āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32).
Actually we have seen in many places, a rich man has got Deity. The other day we went to a place. The Deity is there, but Deity is not worshiped. Deity is not offered anything. That is not good. That man is very rich man. According to his position, one must offer prepared foodstuff, distribute prasādam, not that... Generally, the impersonalists, they do so. There are many big, big temples, big, big Deities, but the Deity is offered a little elaichianna.(?) That is not good. If you establish Deity, you must worship to the best capacity of your possession. That is Deity worship.
But if one hasn't got to offer anything, he can offer everything within the mind. This facility is there. Therefore it is apratihatā, it cannot be checked, apratihatā. Because bhakti can be executed practically also within the mind. It cannot be checked. But if you have got something to offer to Kṛṣṇa, don't think that "I shall offer in my mind. "That is... Kṛṣṇa is also very intelligent, that "He is cheating Me." Kṛṣṇa wants how much you are sacrificing in devotion, bhaktyā. Kṛṣṇa is not after your goods. That is explained in the Bhagavad, tad ahaṁ bhakty-upahṛtam aśnāmi. Patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyam (BG 9.26). Kṛṣṇa is prepared to accept from you even a little leaf, patram, even a little flower, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalam, a little fruit. Anyone can secure these. Even if you cannot secure, if you are so poor or unable, you can offer Kṛṣṇa everything within the mind.
Well, impersonalists, they have no spiritual activities practically. They have got some ritualistic performances to come to the platform of negativing this material condition. Just like to find out...
Just like you take milk. So you have to find out where the butter is there. So if you know the process, then you can find out the butter. But if you do not know the process, you can say, "Oh, this is simply milk. Where is butter?" You must know the process.
Similarly, the impersonalists, they think that "I am Brahman, but I am not this matter." That is a fact. I am spirit. I am not this matter. But that understanding is not sufficient. What is my position as spirit? Then, when we come to the supreme spirit, the all-spirit, that is perfection of knowledge. So impersonal conception is simply a negation of these material varieties. But above that, there is spiritual variety. And that is real knowledge. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
All the yoga practice or philosophical speculation or anything—all practice targets to one point—that I am spirit soul. Ahaṁ brahmāsmi, I am Brahman. I am not this matter. This is perfection. A man who has made sufficient progress to this realization is more perfect. This is the way of perfection. And assured of liberation in the Supreme in the very near future. One has simply... If I am realized then this material composition of this body is disbursed and I am the spirit soul, small particle, I am immediately promoted to the spiritual sky. That is the highest perfection. In the spiritual sky either you remain as a small spark of spirit soul, molecules. Just like there are millions of molecules of shining matter in the sunshine. So if I remain as molecule in the brahma-jyotir, that is also possible. The impersonalist wants that. Or if I enter into some spiritual planet and associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead that is also another spiritual existence. Although both of them are spiritual existence, this spiritual existence is impersonal. To remain as molecular part of the Brahman rays or spiritual rays, that is impersonal. And to have a spiritual form just like Kṛṣṇa and Viṣṇu, that is another spiritual perfection. That is Vaiṣṇava philosophy.
Yes. There is demand. The impersonalists, they have got one demand, that to become one with the supreme impersonal being. But a devotee has no demand. He simply engages himself to serve Kṛṣṇa for the satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa. They do not want anything in return. That is pure devotion. Just like Lord Caitanya said, na dhanaṁ na janaṁ na sundarīṁ kavitāṁ vā jagadīśa kāmaye: (Cc. Antya 20.29, Śikṣāṣṭaka 4) "I do not want any wealth, I do not want any number of followers, I do not want any nice wife. Simply let me be engaged in Your service." That's all. That is the bhakti-yoga system. When Prahlāda Mahārāja was asked by Lord Nṛsiṁha-deva, "My dear boy, you have suffered for me so much, so whatever you want, you ask for it." So he refused. "My dear master, I am not doing mercantile business with you, that I will take some remuneration from you for my service." This is pure devotion. So yogis or the jñānīs, they are demanding that they should become one with the Supreme. Why one with the Supreme? Because they have got bitter experience by the separation of material pangs. But a devotee has no such thing. The devotee remains, although separate from the Lord, he is fully enjoying in the service of the Lord. Go on.
That is his constitutional position. Either in the spiritual sky or material sky, he's the same. But as you develop in the material world a material body, similarly in the spiritual world you can develop a spiritual body. You follow? Your position is that small particle, but spirit can expand. This expansion in the material world is being done in contact with matter. And in the spiritual world, that expansion can be done in spirit. Here in the material world I am spirit soul. I am different from this body because this body is matter and I am living. I am living force, but this material body is not living force. And in the spiritual world there is everything living force. There is no dead matter. Therefore the body is also spiritual. Just like water with water, water, that's all. But water and oil—distinction. Similarly, I am spirit soul, I am the oil. So I am in the water, so there is distinction. But if I am put into the oil, then everything's all right. So the impersonalists, they do not develop body. They simply remain as spirit particle. That is their idea. But we Vaiṣṇava, we want to serve Kṛṣṇa, therefore we require hands, legs and mouth and tongue, everything. So we are giving such body. As you are getting this body from the womb of the mother, similarly we get body in the spiritual world. Not from the womb of the mother, but there is process to get, you can get.
Now, here somebody may say that "This is too much sectarian, that knowing simply Kṛṣṇa, everything is known." Somebody may say like that. But actually this is the fact. The Vedic statement says like that. Yasmin vijñāte sarvam idaṁ vijñātaṁ bhavati. If you can understand the origin, person, the original person... The Upaniṣad does not say directly, "The original person is Kṛṣṇa," simply because there are so many impersonalists. But the Upaniṣad gives hint that if you can understand the original person, kasmin... This is person. Kasmin vijñāte: "If one is able to understand the Supreme Person," sarvam idaṁ vijñātaṁ bhavati, "then everything becomes known." How? Suppose you want to know... Say I am a foreigner. If I want to know how this American government is going on, oh, I will have to study so many things. But somehow or other, if I made friendship with Mr. Nixon, the president, and if I sit down with him a few days, oh, everything is known. Is it not? Yes. He will disclose everything, that "My government is going on like this." You know. So this is a fact. If you try to understand or if you some way or other understand the original person, Kṛṣṇa, then you understand everything. That will be explained here. Simply by knowing Kṛṣṇa you will understand everything. This wonderful thing is in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Simply try to understand what is Kṛṣṇa and you will gradually understand everything. This is the secret of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And that's a fact.
The demonic nature is that. "I am God. I am everything." So we have to become very cautious, you see, because my material existence means I have got the tinge of demonic nature. And as soon as I get some impetus from another demon, I become again demon. Again I become demon. And then out of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has distinctly forbidden: māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "If you hear the commentary of the impersonalist demons, then your whole thing is spoiled. Your life is spoiled." Go on. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Sarva-nāśa means you lose everything. And because we do not explain demonic explanation, that "I am God, you are God," people do not like. Just like the other day the question was... They explained in different... They like that explanation because demonic. People are generally demonic, more or less. One may be fifty percent demon, another may be eighty percent demon, but everyone in this material world is a demon.
When Śukadeva Gosvāmī described the cowherd boys playing with Kṛṣṇa... So he is remarking that "These boys who are playing with Kṛṣṇa... Who is this Kṛṣṇa?" Itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā. Those, those who are impersonalists, those who are attached to the impersonal brahma-jyotir, for them, He is the target. He is the target. From Him, the brahma-jyotir comes. Itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā. And dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena: "And those who are devotees, for them, here is the Supreme Lord." Dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena. And māyāśritānāṁ nara-dārakeṇa: "And those who are under the influence of māyā, for them, He's ordinary human child." The same person. Different views. One is seeing that the ultimate target of brahma-jyotir, and somebody is seeing that He is the Supreme Lord, and somebody's seeing, "He's ordinary boy." So Kṛṣṇa is visioned under different positions. Under different positions. But He's the Supreme Lord.
It is not that we have manufactured anything. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness is existing since the creation, but at least for the last five thousand years, when Kṛṣṇa was present on this planet, He personally instructed Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and the instruction is left behind Him, this is Bhagavad-gītā. Unfortunately, this Bhagavad-gītā has been misused in so many ways by the so-called scholars and swamis. The impersonalist class, or atheist class of men, they have interpreted Bhagavad-gītā in their own way. When I was in America in 1966, one American lady asked me to recommend an English edition of Bhagavad-gītā so that she could read it. But honestly I could not recommend any one of them, on account of their whimsical explanation. That gave me impetus to write Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. And this present edition, Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, is now published by Macmillan Company, the biggest publisher in the world. And we are doing very nice. We published this Bhagavad-gītā As It Is in 1968, in small edition. It was selling like anything. The trades manager of Macmillan Company reported that our books are selling more and more; others are reducing. Then recently, in this 1972, we have published this Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, complete edition. And Macmillan Company published fifty thousand copies in others, but it was finished in three months and they are arranging for second edition.
Unfortunately, the impersonalists, they have no idea of the form, form of the Lord. Because they're impersonalist, they do not accept any form of the Lord. But there is the form of the Lord. Form of the Lord, there must be. God is accepted as the supreme father. In Christianity also it is accepted, the supreme father. In every religion He's accepted the supreme person, supreme father, supreme master. So how He can be accepted as imperson? From logical point of view... Just like you are a person, your father is a person, his father is also a person, his father is also a person. Go on, even you do not know your topmost forefather, you know it that he was a person. Similarly, the supreme father, the father of all fathers, how He can be imperson? Logically you cannot conclude. He must be a person. And that is the Vedic version also. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate.
So this misconception of life, that "I am God," "There is no God..." Atheists and voidists, they say like that. The voidists, they say śūnyavādi. They say, "There is no God." And the impersonalists, they say that there is God, but there is no head, there is no leg, there is no hand, there is no mouth, there is no, no, no... Ultimately, what is their God? If God has no head, no leg, no body, no mouth, then what is that God? That is also another way of explaining God as zero. The voidists, they directly say, "There is no God. We don't believe in God." That is understandable. But this impersonal explanation of God, that is not understandable. What is this? "God has no leg, neither God has no head, God has no hand, God has no mouth." Then what is that God? They cannot say.
So this impersonalists and the voidists, they are of the same group, denying the existence of God. But that is not the fact. There is God. The devotees know there is God, and He is Bhagavān. God is called Bhagavān Therefore although it is said here... Bhagavad-gītā is spoken by Kṛṣṇa, everyone knows. But in some places in the Bhagavad-gītā it is described as bhagavān uvāca. Bhagavān and Kṛṣṇa—the same person. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). Bhagavān, there is a definition of the word bhagavān.
Then what will be the result? Asaṁśayaṁ samagraṁ māṁ yathā jñāsyasi tac chṛṇu (BG 7.1). Asaṁśayam. We have got vague idea of God. We do not know actually what is God. There is saṁśaya, doubts. Somebody is impersonalist. Somebody is localized. Somebody is personalist. But actually, if we ask every man, "What is your conception of God?" I think hardly anyone will be able to explain what is the meaning of God. They have no clear idea. Is it not a fact? Can any one of you give me a clear idea what do you mean by God? No. Therefore if you want clear idea of God without any doubt, asaṁśayam, and samagram... Samagram means full, not partially. The spiritual understanding is partial in this way, brahmeti paramātmā iti bhagavān iti śabdyate. The Absolute Truth is realized in three features, Brahman, beginning from Brahman, then Paramātmā, Supersoul. I think in Christian world they call holy ghost. Anyway, Paramātmā, the Supersoul. And ultimately the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. That is the statement of the śāstra. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). If you want to know, here is Bhagavān.
It is a process to remove all the dirty things from the heart. Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12). And as soon as the heart is cleansed of all dirty things, material contamination, then we can see what is our relationship with Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, Kṛṣṇa recommends that "Somehow or other, you try to be attached to Me." And the Gosvāmīs also, Rūpa Gosvāmī recommends, yena tena prakāreṇa manaḥ kṛṣṇe niveśayet: "Somehow or other, try to apply your mind in Kṛṣṇa." It is not very difficult. Here is Kṛṣṇa's form, arcā-mūrti. If you constantly see Kṛṣṇa's form, śyāmasundaram acintya-guṇa-svarūpam Acintya-guṇa-svarūpam. Kṛṣṇa is acintya-guṇa-svarūpam; therefore He is nirguṇa. Generally, guṇa means these material qualities: sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa, tamo-guṇa. But when we speak of nirguṇa, that means we transcend the guṇas of this material world. Guṇamayī mama māyā. We transcend the guṇas or qualities of māyā. This is called nirguṇa. But Kṛṣṇa is acintya-guṇa-svarūpam. Because Kṛṣṇa does not possess these material qualities, therefore it is acintya, inconceivable by us. But He has that guṇa. He has guṇa. His guṇas are not material qualities. Just like even the leader of the impersonalist school, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, he said, nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. Nārāyaṇa is transcendental, para. Bhagavad-gītā also, paras tasmāt tu bhāvo 'nyaḥ (BG 8.20).
So for, by standard knowledge, by understanding Vedas, that is standard knowledge. Still, although they are siddhas, still they do not understand Kṛṣṇa. Just like karmīs, jñānīs, yogis, they have taken to standard knowledge. That's a fact. But still, they cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādīs, the impersonalists, the speculators, they cannot understand. They are surprised, that "How Kṛṣṇa can be the Absolute Truth?" Even a, a great scholar, Dr. Radhakrishnan, he's also amazed. He says that "Bhagavad-gītā is mental speculation." And when Kṛṣṇa says on the Ninth Chapter... He writes commentary. Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). He says that "It is not up to Kṛṣṇa, but the fact which is within Kṛṣṇa." So he does not know what is Kṛṣṇa, and still, he dares to write commentary on Bhagavad-gītā. This is the difficulty. Kṛṣṇa has no inside or outside. Kṛṣṇa is all spirit, all spirit. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1). So he does not know. Not only he, many does not know.
The Absolute Truth is the ultimate truth, tattva. Tattva means Absolute Truth. So those who are aware of the Absolute Truth, they say that Absolute Truth is one, but He's realized in three angle of vision, namely, Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. Those who are trying to speculate and understand the Absolute Truth, they can realize up to impersonal Brahman. So generally, speculators means big, big philosophers. They can understand that impersonal Brahman. These impersonalists are generally known as jñānīs. Jñānīs means the wise men or persons who are very much aware of everything. So they can understand the impersonal feature of the Absolute Truth. But there are other class who are called yogis. The yogis can understand the Paramātmā feature of the Absolute Truth. Paramātmā means the Supersoul who is situated within everyone's heart. And the personal feature of the Lord is realized by the bhaktas, or the devotees.
Wherever there is a living entity, these four things are there. It doesn't matter whether he is human being or a small microbe. These things are there. Nitya-siddha. Similarly, kṛṣṇa-bhakti, love of Kṛṣṇa, that is also natural. It is not artificial. Nitya-siddha kṛṣṇa-bhakti. But somehow or other, by our association with this material nature, we have forgotten. We are not material nature. That is the first education of Kṛṣṇa consciousness or spiritual knowledge. We are spiritual, and Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godead, He is also complete spirit. He is not material. Even the impersonalist, Śaṅkarācārya, he has described about Nārāyaṇa in his commentary on Bhagavad-gītā, nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. Nārāyaṇa, the Personality of Godhead, is not anything of this material world. Paraḥ avyaktāt, avyaktāt andha sambhavaḥ. But from the avyaktāt, this material world, or the universe, is created. Therefore Nārāyaṇa or Kṛṣṇa... Kṛṣṇa is the original Nārāyaṇa. That is a big definition or understanding from the Vedic knowledge, that Kṛṣṇa, from Kṛṣṇa first expansion is Baladeva, from Baladeva there is Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna, Aniruddha. In this way, expansion takes place. And from Saṅkarṣaṇa also Nārāyaṇa, Vaikuṇṭha Nārāyaṇa. And from Nārāyaṇa the Puruṣa Avatāra, Viṣṇu. In this way there is expansion. Rāmādi-mūrtiṣu kalā-niyamena tiṣṭhan. So, the Nārāyaṇa or expansion of Nārāyaṇa, Kṛṣṇa or expansion of Kṛṣṇa, they are not of this material world. Nārāyaṇaḥ avyaktāt. Paras tasmat tu bhavah anyah. There is another, spiritual, world. Vyako 'vyaktāt sanātanaḥ. Avyaktāt is material, and above this avyaktāt, there is a sanātanaḥ, eternal abode.
The ultimate, the last word of the Absolute Truth is the Supreme Person. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). Unless one realizes Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, there is no question of perfection. And because one is not in complete perfection, there is chance of coming down. Therefore Kṛṣṇa has said, kaścit, kaścid vetti mām. But there is chance. If an impersonalist becomes in association with a personalist devotee, then there is chance of siddhi. Otherwise there is no chance. This siddhi, the so-called siddhi, vimukta-māninaḥ, "I have become liberated," (break) ...that he can fall down. And that we see practically. Big, big sannyāsīs—brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā—they give up this world as mithyā, but again they come to these worldly activities: opening schools, opening hospital and politics and sociology, so many things. But if it is mithyā, why you are engaged in this?
Therefore Kṛṣṇa says manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu (BG 7.3). Actually liberated person is a devotee. Sa guṇān samatītyaitān brahma-bhūyāya kalpate (BG 14.26). Not these impersonalists. They do not know what is siddhi. They simply talk big words. That's all. Real siddhi is that, to be engaged. Why Brahman is mithyā, er, why this jagat is mithyā? The Vaiṣṇava who knows how to serve Kṛṣṇa, he does not take anything as mithyā. Because Kṛṣṇa is the Absolute Truth, why anything emanation from Kṛṣṇa should be mithyā? How it is possible? If something is prepared from gold, why it should be valueless? It is also gold. Similarly if this world, yato vā imāni bhūtāni jāyante, all these things have emanated from this Absolute Truth, then why it is mithyā? It is not mithyā. It is mithyā... The way in which we are, I mean to say, behaving, that is mithyā. We are behaving with this material world with an enjoying spirit, as our enjoyable things. That is mithyā. It is not your enjoyable thing. It is Kṛṣṇa's enjoyable thing. That is truth. We do not know what is truth. Therefore we do not know what is siddhi.
Therefore Kṛṣṇa said in the beginning of this chapter that jñānaṁ me. Jñānaṁ te 'haṁ sa-vijñānam (BG 7.2). It is a great science. It is not a speculative; it is not imagination. Just like sometimes they create imagined God. The impersonalists, they think there is no God. "God is not personal, but is impersonal. So you can imagine any form." That is rascaldom. That is not Kṛṣṇa; that is not God. How, with your limited senses, imperfect senses, you can imagine God? Whatever you imagine, that is rascaldom, that is not Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu kaścid vetti māṁ tattvataḥ (BG 7.3). If you want to know Kṛṣṇa, then you must become Kṛṣṇa's devotee. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti (BG 18.55). You cannot understand by your so-called scholarship, imaginative power. That is not possible. Athāpi te deva padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda-leśānugṛhīta eva hi, jānāti tattvam (SB 10.14.29). Again that tattvam. "One who has achieved a little favor of You, he can understand you by tattvata, in truth." Athāpi te deva padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda, padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda-leśānugṛhīta eva hi, jānāti tattvam, na cānya, na ca anya, ciram, for good, for many, many millions of years, vicinvan, simply by speculating. That is not possible. There are many places like that.
Just like in our body there are some superior part and some inferior part. We have got the brain, that is superior part. But there are other parts where we pass stool and urine. Everything is part of my body, but the position is different, superior and inferior. Similarly, everything is God—sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma—but still, there must be distinction between the superior and the inferior. Although it is Brahman, still, for practical use there is superior and inferior distinction. Those who do not make this distinction foolishly, they are called nirviśeṣavādī, impersonalist, without any varieties. But there are varieties actually. Although the body is one, there is no doubt about it, but different parts of the body are considered as superior and inferior.
The controversy about the Absolute Truth, whether the Absolute Truth is form or formless... There are many philosophers. They, some of them are impersonalists, and some of them are personalists. They... In India the impersonalists are known as Māyāvādī, and the personalists, they are known as Vaiṣṇavas.
So here the decision is given by Kṛṣṇa Himself, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Kṛṣṇa means Bhagavān. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). This is the conclusion of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. And in the Ṛg Veda also it is said, tad viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padam: "Viṣṇu is the Supreme"; sadā paśyanti sūrayaḥ, "Those who are demigods, or advanced in spiritual knowledge, they always look after the lotus feet of Viṣṇu." But the demons, they do not know that the Viṣṇu is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Absolute Truth. They cannot. Because they have taken the atheistic attitude, they cannot understand the Absolute Truth as the Supreme Person.
The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means... You can understand who is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There are so many societies all over the world, so many religious systems, but they cannot give exact idea of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Some has got some idea, others have got other idea, but so far we are concerned, we are fixed up in Kṛṣṇa. And that is rightly. Because Kṛṣṇa is supported not only by the Vedas and by the demigods, headed by Lord Brahmā, and authorities like Vyāsadeva, Asita, Devala. And Arjuna, who heard Bhagavad-gītā personally from the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he also admits. All the ācāryas. Even Śaṅkarācārya, although he was impersonalist, he admits, "Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead," sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. Nārāyaṇa... He also admits that "Nārāyaṇa is not a person of this created material world," nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. And he admits also, kṛṣṇas tu..., sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ, "He has appeared as the son of Devakī and Vasudeva." He admits.
Then, therefore, Kṛṣṇa says, teṣāṁ jñānī nitya-yuktaḥ. Jñānī is nitya-yukta. Jñānī is not a... He is not a jñānī, or man in knowledge, who is not eternally engaged in the service of Kṛṣṇa. There are... There is a class of jñānī, impersonalists. They say that "Because to worship impersonal is very difficult for us, so imagine some form of God." They are not jñānīs; they are fools. Oh, you cannot imagine the form of God. God is so great. That may be your imagination, but that is not the form of God. That is concoction. They are called iconographer, iconographer. There are two classes of men: iconoclast and iconographer. Those who imagine the form of God, they are not jñānī, they are iconographer. And those who think that "I have killed God" or "I have finished God," they are iconoclast. Just like in India we have experienced during British days. There were Hindu-Muslim riots. So the Hindus would go to the mosque of the Muslim and break it, and the Muslim would go the temples of the Hindus and break the idol. And they'll think that "We have finished Hindu's God." Just like Hindus also think, "Oh, we have broken their mosque. Therefore I have broken their God." These are foolishness. In another case... I have got experience. When there was, I mean to say, noncooperation movement of Gandhi's, the people became riotous, and they began to break anything government, especially the post boxes on the street. They thought by breaking the post boxes they are finishing the post office.
So these are foolishness. They are not jñānī. One who has got real conception of God, they have no quarrel with each other. All the history of religious fight, Hindu-Muslim or Christian-non-Christian, they are all ignorant. They are all ignorant. One who is in the knowledge, he knows that God is one. God cannot be Hindu. God cannot be Muslim. God cannot be Christian. God is God. He has no material qualification. It is our conception that "God is such and such. God is such and such." That is imagination. That is called iconographer. So they are not jñānī. They are not man in knowledge. Man in knowledge is different. He knows that God is transcendental. Just like even Śaṅkarācārya, the impersonalist, he said, nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. And in the morning also we have discussed the point that one who knows God transcendental, above this material qualities, he knows.
So now here in the Bhagavad-gītā the Lord Kṛṣṇa says that bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). There are so many transcendentalists. That means those who are trying to realize the Supreme Absolute Truth. There are many different kinds of spiritual process. So they have been analyzed into three groups. Although they are many, still, they have been put into three groups. What are they? The first are the impersonalists, brahmavādīs. Impersonal Brahman. Just like the same example: In the sunshine your eyes are dazzled. You do not see. If you go little over this planet, earth planet, by aeroplane, and if there is full sunshine, you don't see anything except sunshine. But that does not mean there is nothing beyond sunshine. But my eyes are dazzled by the sunshine. Just like in during daytime you do not find the stars due to the dazzling sunshine, but you don't think that because you do not see the planets or stars during daytime, they are vanquished, there is nothing. No. Similarly, those who are trying to understand the Absolute Truth, they first of all realize that brahma-jyotir. In the Bhagavad-gītā you'll find, about that brahma-jyotir, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ pratiṣṭhā. Just like the sunshine.
So the impersonalists, brahmavādīs, they realize about that brahma-jyotir. And the yogis, they realize the Supersoul, Supersoul. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati: (BG 18.61) "Īśvara, the Supreme Lord, by His plenary portions, He is situated in everyone's heart." We are sitting together. Several times we have described this, that two birds are sitting in the same tree. The two birds means one, the Supersoul, and other, the individual living entity. So by yogic process, by concentrating our mind, focusing our mind to the Supersoul, one can experience that partial, plenary expansion of the Lord, Supersoul. Just like in the... The same example can be given, that the sun, at noontime, if you inquire thousands and thousands of people scattered over thousands and thousands of miles away, everyone will say that "The sun is on my head." Similarly, the Supreme Lord is also represented by the Supersoul conception in everyone's heart. Not only in everyone's heart, but even in every atom He is represented. So that realization is the second stage. And the third stage is to realize the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa.
Now, there are two classes of transcendentalists. One class of transcendentalists, just like the impersonalists, they want to stop activities. They think like that, that when one becomes one with the Transcendence, then their activities stop. But actually, from the Bhagavad-gītā we find that te kṛtsnam adhyātmaṁ karma cākhilam. Their activities are not stopped, but the quality of the activity is changed. Brahman. The quality of activities becomes transcendental. Karma cākhilam. Akhila. Whatever he does in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, whatever he does, that becomes Brahman, or transcendental. That means free from the contamination of the three modes of material nature. Therefore, as he becomes free from the contamination of the three modes of material nature, therefore he's not going to have next body of this material nature. Next body he's not going to have material... The same example: just the, if you put iron rod into the fire, it becomes gradually the fire. The nature of fire the iron rod attains. So when it is red-hot, there is no possibility of its being the iron, but it is fire.
So as we have several times explained that we are all Brahman, but we are part and parcel of the Brahman. Now here it is said that paramaṁ brahma, the Supreme Brahman. The Supreme Brahman means one who does not come into this material contamination. He is called Supreme Brahman. The impersonalist school, they do not distinguish between these two Brahmans. They say, "Brahman is one. This individual Brahman, this conception of individual Brahman, is māyā, illusion." That is their doctrine. But according to Vaiṣṇava doctrine, they do not accept this. Their question is, "If Brahman is Supreme, then how He comes in contact with the māyā?" A Supreme cannot be under the subordinate, subordination of anything else. If something is under subordination, he cannot be Supreme. He cannot be Supreme. That is their argument.
So according to the description, these pictures are drawn. It is not imagination. So this form is factual. It is not imagination. The Māyāvāda philosophers, impersonalists, they answer the Bhagavad-gītā's word that kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām... (BG 12.5). One who is attached to impersonal views, their process of meditation or execution of spiritual activities is very troublesome. Now, therefore Māyāvāda philosopher, they say that "God has no form. But because you cannot meditate upon the formless, so you just imagine any form you like." So God is not subjected to your imagination. That is not God's form. If we imagine something... And that has been degraded. Śaṅkarācārya limited such imaginative forms to five only. Five. What is that five? Viṣṇu, Lord Śiva, and Sun, and Gaṇeśa, and Devī, Durgā. He limited, that "Any of these five forms you can meditate upon, you worship. And ultimately, it is formless." But at the present moment, unauthorized person has degraded in such a way that "You can imagine any form. You can imagine even stool." They say like that. You see.
At the time of death, point of death, "Ommmm," if he can pronounce om, oṁkāra... Oṁkāra is the concise form of transcendental vibration, oṁkāra. So om ity ekākṣaraṁ brahma vyāharan. If he can vibrate this sound, oṁkāra, at the same time, mām anusmaran, plus he remembers Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu... The whole yoga system is to concentrate his mind to Viṣṇu. But the impersonalists, they imagine that this is the form of Viṣṇu, or the Lord. But those who are personalists, they do not imagine; they see actual form of the Supreme Lord.
So for the yogi, those who are impersonalists, for them, this process is recommended. What is that? Om ity ekākṣaraṁ brahma vyāharan: "Just vibrating this transcendental sound, om, and leave this body." Then yaḥ prayāti: "Anyone who is able..." (aside:) Where is the watch? That's all right. "Anyone who is able to quit this material body in these circumstances, simply by uttering this transcendental sound, om, with full consciousness of the Supreme Lord, then he's sure to be transferred, to transmigrate in the spiritual world."
But those who are not personalists, they cannot enter into the spiritual planet. They remain outside. Just like the sunshine and the sun disc. The sunshine is not different from the sunshine, sun disc, but still, the sunshine is not the sun disc. Similarly, those who are transferred in the spiritual world, they remain in the effulgence of the Supreme Lord, which is called brahma-jyotir. Brahmajyoti.
Last day we have been discussing the, how the impersonalists, they transfer themselves in the spiritual kingdom. The yogis and the jñānīs, they are generally impersonalists. So for them, the process—at the time of death, they vibrate the transcendental sound om, oṁkāra, and by that way they transfer to the spiritual world, but they do not enter into the spiritual planet. This point we have discussed. And the risk is that if we do not have any rest in the spiritual planet, if we remain in the outer space only, then there is risk of coming down again in this material world.
So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness was given by Lord Caitanya. Therefore He's, I mean to say, recommended... He's called that namo mahā-vadānyāya: "Oh, You are the most powerful, charitable personality. Nobody has given such a thing—Kṛṣṇa." Because we are all in want of Kṛṣṇa. So that is the process given by Kṛṣṇa Himself. And here Kṛṣṇa says that "I am..." Tasyāhaṁ sulabhaḥ pārtha: "I am... I become very cheap to him." Whom? "One who is constantly engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness." And if you remain twenty-four hours in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then—just like the impersonalists, the yogis, the jñānīs, they transfer themselves to the spiritual world in the..., and merge into the impersonal effulgence—you enter into the planet where Kṛṣṇa is. Then what is the benefit? You can ask, "Well, suppose I do this and enter into the Kṛṣṇa planet, then what is the benefit?"
And where you shall do, what you shall do there? Some philosophers think that that spiritual atmosphere must be impersonal, impersonal, void. There are some philosophers, they think like that, that "There is. We accept the spiritual atmosphere." The impersonalists, Śaṅkarites, even the Buddhists, they also, some way or other, they accept that there is the voidness. But the Bhagavad-gītā does not disappoint you in that way. That voidness philosophy has created atheism. Because, just try to understand clearly, I am spiritual being. I want enjoyment. That is my life. I want enjoyment. But as soon as my future is void, I must be inclined to enjoy this material life. Therefore they simply discuss this voidness impersonalism, but they enjoy as much as possible this material life. Simply armchair philosophical discussion. But as soon as we see their behavior, they're too much attached with the material enjoyment.
So there are different kinds of liberation. Now, any one, any of these five kinds of liberations you can have. But out of the five, the sāyujya-mukti, or the liberation by becoming merged into the existence of the Supreme, is not accepted by the Vaiṣṇava philosophers. We belong to the Vaiṣṇava philosophical school, Vaiṣṇava. Vaiṣṇava means we want to worship God as He is, and we keep our separate identity eternally to serve Him. That is Vaiṣṇava philosophy. And the Māyāvāda philosophy and impersonalist philosophy is that they want to close their individual identity and merge into the existence of the Supreme.
Now, here Lord Kṛṣṇa does not advise you... That is a suicidal policy. That policy is neither recommended by Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the Bhagavad-gītā, neither the Vaiṣṇava philosophers, they accept it, to merge.
Then Kṛṣṇa says, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4). Avyakta-mūrtinā: the impersonalist. We understand Kṛṣṇa is person. And what is imperson? Imperson is the expansions of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Just like we can understand by this example, that the sun is person, localized. It is a globe. And within the sun there is sun-god. The sun-god is a person. His name is Vivasvān. That is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā: imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). So Kṛṣṇa spoke this Bhagavad-gītā first to sun-god. So when asked, Kṛṣṇa spoke in this word to Arjuna. Arjuna is a person, and Kṛṣṇa is also person, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). Similarly, Kṛṣṇa spoke to sun-god; he is also a person, but that person should go... I may say, sun-god, his bodily rays is the sunshine, and in the sunshine the whole material world exists. Similarly, there is real sunshine, which is called brahma-jyotir, that is coming out of the body of Kṛṣṇa. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). So this impersonal brahma, sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma, that is Kṛṣṇa's personal rays.
The same example. Just like when we say everything is resting on the sunshine, that does not mean everything is in the sun but the sunshine is not different from the sun. Therefore you can say that, expanded form, everything is resting on the sun. Try to understand this analogy. So nothing can exist without God, nothing is except God, but still, everything is not God. That has to be understood. This is called acintya-bhedābheda-tattva, simultaneously one and different. So the conclusion is, the Māyāvādī philosophy, impersonalists, they say that if God has expanded in everything there is no particular personal existence of God. That is Māyāvāda philosophy. But that is not the fact. Fact is that although God is personal, He is person. Just like you are person, I am person, He is person, but He is the Supreme Person. And everything is expanded by His energy. In another place, in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa, it is explained very nicely that parasya brahmaṇaḥ śaktis tathedam akhilaṁ jagat.
In India, our culture, Vedic culture, depending on ācāryas. Even we differ, we Vaiṣṇavas... There are Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, and there is Māyāvādī ācāryas. So Śaṅkarācārya, he is Māyāvādī, impersonalist; still, he accepts Kṛṣṇa, (as) the Supreme Personality of Godhead, sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ devakī-nandanaḥ. He has written in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā. He accepts. Nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt, sa bhagavān nārāyaṇaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ. He has accepted. And what to speak of Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya and other ācāryas. Latest ācārya Kṛṣṇa, er, Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu, five hundred years... These ācāryas are thousands of years ago, they appeared. Caitanya Mahāprabhu appeared near about five hundred years ago. He accepted Kṛṣṇa—the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And we are followers of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Ācāryavān puruṣo veda: "One who is ācāryavān, one who is following ācārya, he knows things as they are." Ācāryavān puruṣo veda.
So those who are impersonalists, they prefer these three processes. And those who are personalists, they prefer directly to worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. So they're all transcendentalists. They're on the line. But here in the Bhagavad-gītā, those who are directly worshiping the Supreme Lord, they have been described as mahātmā. And those who are worshiping in other processes, they have been described, anye. Anye means others. So they have not been given so much importance, although they have been accepted. They have been... Because they have come to the line. Because... Suppose you are accepting the universal form of God. That is a fact also. Because the universe, the manifestation of the universe, is also manifestation of the energy of God. And the energy of God and God is not different. So therefore one who takes the manifestation of the energy as God, he's not mistaken. That is also true. Because there is nothing beyond God. If you think, "I am God," yes, you are also God. Because there is nothing beyond God. Ahaṅgrahopāsanam. If you think everything is God, that is also true. Because in the higher conception, there is nothing beyond God. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Sarvam, everything.
There are five stages of evolution: śakta, then gāṇapatya, then saura, then śaiva, then vaiṣṇava. In this way, there are five stages. So the impersonalists, they worship in five ways, pañcopāsanā. They are called pañcopāsanā. So one, when he comes to the Viṣṇu stage, he comes to the real stage. But impersonal Viṣṇu, all-pervading Viṣṇu, but when he come to the personal Viṣṇu, then that is perfection of worship. So, so any kind of worship, the Lord accepts, in this way. But that acceptance and devotional acceptance is different. If you are worshiping materialism, that's all right. You get material benefit. Actually you are getting. You are getting. But that is not spiritual. Ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham (BG 4.11). One who worships the Supreme Lord materially, he gets material benefit. And one who worships spiritually, he gets spiritual benefit. But you cannot expect spiritual benefit by material worship. That is not possible. Everything accepted as the worship of the Supreme, but they have got different result also.
Avidhi-pūrvakam. Now Kṛṣṇa says... Of course, in India there are different types of worship. That I have already explained. Mostly they worship Lord Kṛṣṇa, mostly. At least 80% of the people, they are Viṣṇu worshiper. And 20% of the people, Hindus, they are worshiper of different gods and impersonalists, like that, still. So here Kṛṣṇa says... But because that is recommended in the Vedic literature. Why? The Vedic literature... That I explained the other day, that worship of different gods, that is also along with Viṣṇu worship. Ārādhanānāṁ sarveṣāṁ viṣṇor ārādhanaṁ param. Viṣṇu is the central point. Without Viṣṇu worship, with(out) Kṛṣṇa worship, no other worship is successful. So here, those who worship other gods in this conception, that because God is everything, therefore the, any demigod, because the demigod... People, those who are less intelligent, they worship demigod to take immediate effect. Just like a man who is diseased, he is recommended to worship the sun. Sun. Now, that is effective.
Now, the argument that "In whatever form you worship the Supreme..." This is the Māyāvādī theory, that "God is impersonal. Now, because we cannot worship or meditate on something impersonal, therefore let us imagine something about Him and meditate upon that." Just like the impersonalist yogis. They put before them a lump of something and concentrate upon them. So here that theory is refuted by Kṛṣṇa. That impersonal conception of the Supreme and our imagination of God, that is not the way of approaching God. He says clearly herewith that yānti deva-vratā devān: "Those who are worshiping the demigods..."
So Kṛṣṇa is the best and foremost ācārya, and He is accepted as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In India all schools of, I mean to say, transcendentalists, the impersonalists and the personalists, all of them, they have accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There is no doubt about it. So here the Lord says Himself that "I eat." So we cannot say that He does not eat. "He does not eat"—in favor of my conclusion, there is no evidence. But here is the evidence, accepted evidence, that God eats. If God eats, then why don't you offer Him to eat? Where is the harm? What is the harm? If your little fruits and flowers offered to God, He accepts it, why don't you offer it? You want to please so many. You flatter so many bosses by supplying good dishes and so many things, and why don't you try to please God? What is the harm? Is there any loss? You are eating every day, and before eating, if you offer to God, what is the harm there? Why people do not take this formula and see the result? If actually God eats from your hand, oh, how much advanced you become in spiritual life you do not know. He accepts your things from your hand. How much fortunate you are.
What is that? Somebody's trying to realize his self. I am not this body. He understands that I am not this body. I am spirit soul. Then? If you are spirit soul, then what is your position? Oh, void. Impersonal. Spirit soul, that means voidness? Oh, there is nothing after finishing this body? This voidness? There are philosophers who preach voidness. After this, finishing this body, there is nothing. And other philosophers, impersonalists, they say that, as soon as this body is finished, my personal identity is finished. Do you think like that? Is it possible? So long I am in this body, this body is not actual I am.
So about the soul and Supersoul, ṛṣibhiḥ, great sages, saintly persons, they have also discussed. Just like in the present age also, we are different parties, the impersonalist and the personalist. Śaṅkara-sampradāya, they ascertain the Absolute Truth as impersonal, nirviśeṣa, and the Buddhists, they ascertain, "The Absolute Truth is zero."
We are struggling—nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi. We are struggling against these nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi, voidists and impersonalists. So it is not now new. From time immemorial there are different views. But Kṛṣṇa refers herewith that brahma-sūtra-padaiḥ hetumadbhir viniścitaṁ. Others... There are many other books of knowledge. They are not very reasonable. That is dogmatic. But hetumadbhiḥ, if we accept with our logic and sense, that is first-class book which gives us information of the ātmā, Paramātmā.
This tree, being the reflection of the real tree, is an exact replica. Everything is there in the spiritual world. The impersonalists take Brahmā to be the root of this material tree, and from the root, according to sāṅkhya philosophy, come prakṛti, puruṣa, then the three guṇas, then the five gross elements (pañca-mahābhūta), then the ten senses (daśendriya), mind, etc. In this way they divide up the whole material world. If Brahmā is the center of all manifestations, then this material world is a manifestation of the center by 180 degrees, and the other 180 degrees constitute the spiritual world. The material world is the perverted reflection, so the spiritual world must have the same variegatedness, but in reality. The prakṛti is the external energy of the Supreme Lord, and the puruṣa is the Supreme Lord Himself, and that is explained in Bhagavad-gītā. Since this manifestation is material, it is temporary. A reflection is temporary, for it is sometimes seen and sometimes not seen.
Śukadeva Gosvāmī says that these boys who are playing with Kṛṣṇa... Kṛṣṇa is brahma-sukhānubhūtyā, the origin of brahma-sukha. It is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ pratiṣṭhā: "The Brahman, the impersonal Brahman, is situated on Me." Because Brahman is the bodily effulgence of Kṛṣṇa. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭiḥ (Bs. 5.40). Therefore Śukadeva Gosvāmī says that "These boys, they are not ordinary boys. They are playing with the Supreme Brahman." Itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā. And dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena. And those who are devotees, those who have taken their position as eternal servant of God, dāsyaṁ gatānām, for them, He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. For the impersonalists, He is the Supreme Brahman. And for the personalists, devotees, He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And māyāśritānāṁ nara-dārakeṇa. And those who are under the influence of the illusory energy, māyā, for them, this Kṛṣṇa is ordinary boy. Māyāśritānām. They cannot see Kṛṣṇa. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). Those who are mūḍhas, not sufficient knowledge, poor fund of knowledge, they accept Kṛṣṇa as ordinary person.
So there are two kinds of muktis. So far sāyujya-mukti is concerned, that is not very sure. What is this sound? (thumping sound like drum or machine in background) Sāyujya-mukti, one who takes liberation of merging into the existence of the Supreme Absolute Truth, that is not very secure position because they may fall down again to the material world. That is also stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). These impersonalists, after undergoing severe austerities... To come to the Brahman platform, impersonal Brahman platform, that is also not very easy. One has to undergo severe austerities. Tapasya. Nothing can be achieved with(out) tapasya. Any kind of liberation cannot be achieved without tapasya. That is the verdict of all Vedic literature. You cannot make it very easily accessible, but for this age it is easily accessible. Because the people are not so advanced, therefore śāstra gives them a little concession.
So it doesn't matter where we are born. If we take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then he becomes a śuddha, śuci, purified, and he is eligible to go back to home, to back to Godhead. So to take the shelter of a pure devotee means he knows what is pravṛtti and what is nivṛtti. All our Vedic literature is meant for nivṛtti. Pravṛttir eṣā bhūtānāṁ nivṛttis tu mahā-phalā. These, all living creatures, who are struggling for existence in this material world, that is their pravṛtti, to enjoy this material world. But when one becomes inclined to nivṛtti, he becomes devatā. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement which was inaugurated by Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu is for nivṛtti-mārga. Nivṛtti-mārga means "No more material enjoyment. Let me make progress towards Kṛṣṇa consciousness." Therefore this devotional service or bhakti-yoga, it is called nivṛtti-mārga. This is confirmed in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,
- vāsudeve bhagavati
- bhakti-yogaḥ prayojitaḥ
- janayaty āśu vairāgyaṁ
- jñānaṁ ca yad ahaitukam
- (SB 1.2.7)
Bhakti-yoga... And Sarvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, he was a impersonalist, followers of the Śaṅkara philosophy. When he became convinced about the Vaiṣṇava philosophy, he wrote one hundred ślokas, prayers to Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
There are millions and millions and trillions of living entities, and each heart, He is sitting there. Sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca (BG 15.15). He is managing like that. So if we think that He is a controller like us, that is our misconception. He is controller. There is controller. With unlimited knowledge and unlimited assistants, with unlimited potencies, He is managing. These impersonalists, they cannot think of that a person can be so unlimitedly powerful. Therefore they become impersonalist. They cannot think of. The impersonalists, they cannot imagine... They imagine, "When one is person, he is a person like me. I cannot do this. Therefore He cannot do." Therefore they are mūḍha. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ (BG 9.11). They are comparing Kṛṣṇa with themself. As he is a person, similarly, Kṛṣṇa is a person. He does not know. The Vedas inform that "Although He is person, He is maintaining all unlimited persons." That they do not know. Eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān. That one singular person, He is maintaining many millions, many millions, trillions of persons. We are each, every one, we are person. I am person. You are person. The ant is person. The cat is person. Dog is person, and the insect is person. The trees are person. Everyone is person. Everyone is person. And there is another person. That is God, Kṛṣṇa. That one person is maintaining all these varieties of millions and trillions of persons. This is the Vedic in... Eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). This is the information.
Otherwise don't try to become guru. Impersonalists, half-understood, partially understood, he cannot become guru. This is the Caitanya Mahāprabhu's formula. Therefore first of all try to understand Kṛṣṇa. You will understand in such a way that you can refute all others' argument, all others' opposition. There are so many opposing elements. Then you are guru. Otherwise you cannot become a guru. Guru is not so teeny thing or trifle thing that everyone becomes Guru Mahārāja, no. That is not guru. Sa mahātmā... Vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ (BG 7.19).
| Page Title: | Impersonalist (Lectures, BG) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 25 of Mar, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=92, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 92 |