Interpretation (Lectures, SB)

Expressions researched:
"interpret" |"interpretated" |"interpretation" |"interpretations" |"interpreted" |"interpreter" |"interpreters" |"interpreting" |"interpretive" |"interprets"

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 1.1.3 -- London, August 20, 1971:

Prabhupāda: So actually, this Bhāgavata-saptāha is going on in India in village to village, but we see the effect is that they are not Kṛṣṇa conscious. They are not as good Kṛṣṇa conscious as you are becoming. Because they take it as, as a matter of some refreshment. No. It should be taken very seriously and should be heard from the right source. Then you will get the result.

Pradyumna: "Some of them take this to be immoral, while others try to cover it up by their own stupid interpretations."

Prabhupāda: Yes, sometimes they say, "Oh, Kṛṣṇa is so immoral." Yes, that will be the effect. "Kṛṣṇa is enjoying with others' wives and others' sisters, like that." They'll take it like that. They do it. We have to sometimes explain. They question. Even Parīkṣit Mahārāja questioned. Parīkṣit Mahārāja questioned... Not that he was ignorant. He questioned this fact from Śukadeva Gosvāmī, and it was answered so that others may understand that Kṛṣṇa's pastime is not immoral. That is the highest sublime spiritual pastime. Go on.

Lecture on SB 1.2.5 -- Aligarh, October 9, 1976:

Not that you can manufacture law in your home or in your office or in a big conference by the public. No. Similarly, the word dharma, religion, is explained in the English dictionary, "a sect of faith." And people have interpreted in a different way, that "I can manufacture my own way of religion." It is going on very strong nowadays by some missionary sect, yata mat tata pat. As many ways there are, they are all perfect. That somebody said that to cut throat is my religion. That is also accepted. But that is not religion. Religion means dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam (SB 6.3.19). What is spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead or what is ordained by the supreme authority, that is dharma.

Lecture on SB 1.2.5 -- Aligarh, October 9, 1976:

That is our only request, that in whichever position you are, it doesn't matter. You simply begin this chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra and reading of Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. Don't try to be ustad in interpreting. That is very dangerous. Ustadi is not good. Simply try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Bhagavān says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). "My dear Arjuna, there is no more superior authority than Me." You accept it. That's all. You haven't got to interpret foolishly. No, then you are gone. Then you become condemned.

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Montreal, August 3, 1968:

No, that is not... One cannot say, "I have created myself." It is impossible. Similarly, when Kṛṣṇa says that "I...," tadātmānaṁ sṛjāmy aham... This ātmānam means body, ātmānam means the mind, or ātmānam means the soul. But He is the supreme soul, so how He creates His soul. And He is nondifferent, absolute. Therefore the interpretation given by Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, that "I create" means "I appear..." "I create my appearance." Just like sun creates its appearance. The sun is there already, but when sun appears, it means that you can say like that, that "Sun creates its appearance."

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Delhi, November 12, 1973:

So it becomes sometimes lost. When the paramparā system... Just like nowadays, everyone is proud of reading Bhagavad-gītā, but he interprets in his own way. Everyone is at liberty to interpret Bhagavad-gītā as he likes. That is the modern proposal. So there are 664 editions of Bhagavad-gītā. Everyone is commenting in his own way. I have heard that there is one doctor, some rabbi. He has interpreted Bhagavad-gītā as the talks between a patient and a physician. You see? So this is going on. Everyone whimsically, he is interpreting. Sometimes in our country also, we see that Mahatma Gandhi wanted to interpret Bhagavad-gītā as nonviolence. It is very difficult to prove, because Bhagavad-gītā is spoken in the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra. (laughs) So how you can prove nonviolence?

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Delhi, November 12, 1973:

So Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna that at the present moment the paramparā system is now lost. Yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. Sa kāleneha yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. "It is the paramparā system has been lost because there have been so many interpretation, wrong interpretation. Therefore I am selecting you to make again paramparā." Bhakto 'si sakhā ceti. "Why You are entrusting me? I am not a Vedantist. I am not a sannyāsī. I am not very learned scholar. I am military man. So why You are trying to give the instruction of Bhagavad-gītā unto me?" This question may be raised. Because Arjuna was a family man. He was not a sannyāsī, neither he was a Vedantist. A military man is not expected to become a Vedantist. Kṣatriya, he knows how to fight. And Kṛṣṇa says that "I will speak to you."

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Delhi, November 12, 1973:

Therefore our request is that you read Bhagavad-gītā, try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Don't interpret in a foolish way. Everything is clear. There is no need of interpretation. The foolish people simply unnecessarily interpret. Everything is clear. Where is the difficulty to understand when Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru... (BG 18.65)? But one scholar is saying, "Yes, this is not to Kṛṣṇa the person." Kṛṣṇa says that "You become My devotee," and the scholar says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa." This is interpretation. This is going on, simply misleading people. You take Bhagavad-gītā as it is and try... (end)

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Calcutta, February 26, 1974:

Adhokṣaje, He is beyond the sense perception, akṣaja. Akṣaja-jñāna means sensual perception. He is beyond that, transcendental. But you have to love. So this loving process is the devotional service. First of all... (break) ...try to hear about Kṛṣṇa from Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Don't mal-interpret by your whimsical way. Then you will lose the opportunity. Don't follow these rascals who interpret Bhagavad-gītā. There is no question of interpretation. Take Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Kṛṣṇa says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). Accept that. And the Caitanya-caritāmṛta kaṛacā says, kṛṣṇe bhakti kaile sarva-karma kṛta haya: "Simply by serving Kṛṣṇa you do all of your other duties." So such a nice thing, Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Take it very seriously and do the needful.

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Hyderabad, April 18, 1974:

Yato bhaktiḥ. Bhakti required.

So there are many instances in the śāstras. If you refer to the śāstras... Bhagavad-gītā is the essence of all Vedic literature. You read it carefully. And we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as..., without any malinterpretation. We don't interpret. We present Bhagavad-gītā as it is, and it is working. So I am requesting also in India that you read Bhagavad-gītā as it is. You understand what is the science of God. Your life will be successful.

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Rome, May 24, 1974:

That is called theism. You cannot change. You cannot comment. That is called theism. Āstikyam. Brahma-karma svabhāva-jam (BG 18.42). And unless you have got such faith in the Vedic knowledge, you cannot make any progress. That is not possible. If you, with your poor fund of knowledge, you want to interpret, from the very beginning there is no question of progress.

Therefore you'll find in the Bhagavad-gītā, when Arjuna heard from Kṛṣṇa the principles of Bhagavad-gītā, he said, sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi me (sic:) pāṇḍava: (BG 10.14) "My dear Kṛṣṇa, whatever You have spoken in this instruction, I accept them as perfectly true." You'll find. First of all he said, śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ prapannam (BG 2.7). Of course, sad-dharma-pṛcchat, there must be, but whatever the spiritual master said, he accepted in toto.

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Mauritius, October 5, 1975:

Indian man (3): Swamiji, may I ask, just to... As my friend has just said about the teaching of... In the battlefield, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, about the verse about... Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata (BG 4.7). It is an oft repeated phrase or śloka which has gone deep into the subconscious mind of the Ind..., especially the Hindu people have taken it, probably because of all of the wrong interpretations. That why should we go and tire ourself or make effort? If we are in trouble, oh, just wait for the God to come down to the earth and He will help us and do what we need or defend us?

Prabhupāda: That is your instruction. That is not God's instruction.

Indian man (3): But it has been.

Prabhupāda: No.

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Mauritius, October 5, 1975:

Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: Pessimism. Fatalism.

Brahmānanda: It has been interpreted that this verse means that God will come and therefore we don't have to do anything.

Prabhupāda: God is always present. You carry out the order of God. God is always present. You carry out the order of the God.

Indian man (3): The verse is clear, yadā yadā hi dharmasya (BG 4.7).

Prabhupāda: Yes. So that is being done every moment. Every moment we are forgetting our dharma and God is giving us instruction.

Lecture on SB 1.2.9-10 -- Delhi, November 14, 1973:

So everything is there. If we actually want to make our life perfect, the directions are already there in our... We have got the Vedic knowledge, treasurehouse of spiritual knowledge, and the Bhagavad-gītā is the gist, is the summary. Gītopaniṣad. It is called Upaniṣad. If you simply study Bhagavad-gītā as it is, without foolishly interpreting it... That will spoil. Don't interpret. Just like you are given paramānna, or kṣīra. Everyone knows what is kṣīra, milk and rice cooked together with sugar, very nice foodstuff. But if you add with it several grains of sand, it becomes useless. You can add it, simply a few grains of sand—we spoil Bhagavad-gītā.

Lecture on SB 1.2.9-10 -- Delhi, November 14, 1973:

And it is dharma-kṣetra. Everyone knows. Then where is the difficulty to understand dharma-kṣetra kuru-kṣetra māmakāḥ pāṇḍu? But if you foolishly interpret, "Dharma-kṣetra means this, and kuru-kṣetra means that, and pāṇḍavāḥ means that," you spoil the whole thing. That is going on. Otherwise there is no difficulty. Dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ (BG 1.1). Actually, it is historical fact, Mahābhārata. There was fight between two cousin-brothers. They, "No. Pāṇḍava means this and this. Kuru-kṣetra means this and... This means this." In this way, things are being spoiled. So we are misled in that way. Actually, if we read Bhagavad-gītā as it is, as a devotee... Because without being devotee, nobody can understand Bhagavad-gītā.

Lecture on SB 1.2.11 -- Tirupati, April 26, 1974:

You have to hear of Kṛṣṇa in devotion, bhaktyā, not as a nondevotee. A nondevotee cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. He has no scope. If a nondevotee interprets on the Bhagavad-gītā, he is simply wasting time of himself and others. Here it is clearly stated, bhaktyā śruta-gṛhītayā. One has to become devotee and hear from the authorities. Just like Arjuna. Arjuna was a bhakta. Bhakto 'si priyo 'si sakhā ceti (BG 4.3). And he heard from the Absolute Truth, Kṛṣṇa. Therefore he understood Bhagavad-gītā. So one who has not heard Bhagavad-gītā or about Kṛṣṇa and who is not a devotee, his speaking on Bhagavad-gītā is simply useless waste of time. Yes. (break)

Lecture on SB 1.2.16 -- Vrndavana, October 27, 1972:

We don't care, we don't care for all these nonsense who gives his own opinion as if Kṛṣṇa left something to be opined by another rascal. This is their business. He becomes greater than Kṛṣṇa, to interpret Kṛṣṇa's words. This is rascaldom. We don't accept.

We accept yad vadasi keśava, following the footsteps of Arjuna, who directly understood Bhagavad-gītā. He said, "My dear Kṛṣṇa, whatever You say, I accept them as it is." Then others may say, "Well, Arjuna was Kṛṣṇa's friend. So just to flatter Him, he might have said like that." No. Arjuna gave immediately evidences that "I..., not only I accept You, but great personalities like Vyāsa, Nārada, Devala, Asita, and many others." Authorities. Just like when you speak something in the legal court, you give evidences from other judgement, authorities.

Lecture on SB 1.2.18 -- Vrndavana, October 29, 1972:

"Oh, we are student of Bhagavad-gītā." And what do you know about Kṛṣṇa? "Kṛṣṇa is zero." That's all. This is going on. So therefore Kṛṣṇa says, na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ (BG 7.15). So we have to hear. If we actually want to diminish our anarthas, then we must hear Kṛṣṇa as He's speaking, without any interpretation.

So this is the process of diminishing all dirty things within the heart. Śṛṇvatāṁ sva-kathāḥ kṛṣṇaḥ puṇya-śravaṇa-kīrtanaḥ, hṛdy antaḥ-sthaḥ (SB 1.2.17). Kṛṣṇa is hṛdy antaḥ-sthaḥ, within your heart. Vidhunoti. He washes all dirty things. Kṛṣṇa is taking charge of washing your dirty things. Simply by hearing about, you... Why don't you take this opportunity? What is this nonsense? Kṛṣṇa simply says that "You hear about, from Me." Satataṁ kīrtayanto mām (BG 9.14). "Always chanting about Me, and hearing about Me." Simple process. But the rascals will not take.

Lecture on SB 1.2.24 -- Vrndavana, November 4, 1972:

As we have given several times the example: the Vedas says that cow dung is pure. One who believes in that, he is theist. And one who does not believe in the words of the Vedas, they want to change, they want to misinterpret, interpolate, they are atheists. Bhagavad-gītā, anyone misinterpreting, giving wrong interpretation, or according to his concocted inter..., they are atheists. Theist, he'll believe all the words of Bhagavad-gītā as it is, as Arjuna believed: sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi keśava (BG 10.14). "My dear Kṛṣṇa, whatever You are speaking, without any malinterpretation, without any change of words, I believe in it." This is theist understanding. Not like the so-called rascal scholars: "It is not like this. It is not like that. I think it is like this." These are all rascaldom.

Lecture on SB 1.2.24 -- Vrndavana, November 4, 1972:

Because it appears like ordinary boys and girls, so they like it. No. This is the foundation of Bhāgavata. The nine cantos must be thoroughly read, then one can understand what is rāsa-līlā and what is Kṛṣṇa. If one jumps at once to the platform of understanding Kṛṣṇa's rāsa-līlā or vṛndāvana-līlā, he'll be misled. He'll be misled. Just like so many rascals are interpreting Kṛṣṇa in so many different ways. They are thinking Kṛṣṇa as ordinary human being. So when He acts like ordinary human being, they take Him as ordinary human being—avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11).

Lecture on SB 1.2.25 -- Los Angeles, August 28, 1972:

That is akṣaja, akṣaja. Kṛṣṇa is adhokṣaja. Your paltry research work with limited power of sense, how you can find out Kṛṣṇa? That's not possible.

So we have to take instruction from Kṛṣṇa to understand Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says that "I am the supreme." You have to accept that, in the Bhāgavata. You cannot interpret in a different way: "Yes, Kṛṣṇa is supreme, all right. But..." Not like that. Take it as it is. Kṛṣṇa says ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ (BG 10.8), "I am the original source of everything." Because our inquiries, every scientist, every philosopher is trying to find out the ultimate source. That is called progressive science or philosophy. But here we get the information.

Lecture on SB 1.5.17-18 -- New Vrindaban, June 21, 1969:

"Give up everything. Surrender unto Me," Nārada says the same thing. That is the, I mean to say, significance, that whatever God, or Kṛṣṇa, says, His devotee also will say the same thing. There is no difference. Therefore it is called paramparā. Devotee will not manufacture something, interpretation, which is against the version of Kṛṣṇa. Then he is not devotee. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He is playing the role of a devotee. So Kṛṣṇa says that "You surrender unto Me," and Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, "You surrender unto Kṛṣṇa." So there is no difference between the teaching, teachings of Lord Caitanya and teachings of Lord Kṛṣṇa. The object is the same. So we are... What we are doing? We are also asking people, "Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa," the same thing. There is no difference. Therefore one has to accept the real thing from the paramparā system, serious devotee. Then... Because a serious devotee will speak the same thing as Kṛṣṇa says. There is no invention.

Lecture on SB 1.5.22 -- Vrndavana, August 3, 1974:

Baladeva, in the strength. Nāyam ātmā bala-hīnena labhyaḥ. You cannot understand, realize yourself without the help of Baladeva. Therefore in the Vedic literatures: nāyam ātmā bala-hīnena labhyaḥ. You cannot become self-realized without the help of, without the mercy of Baladeva. Now, our Vivekananda Swami, he interpreted that "Unless you become stout and strong like the bulls and the buffalo, you cannot realize self." He interpreted like that. So he engaged people to make gymnastics, exercise. "You become very stout and strong, eat meat, and..." This is going on. This philosophy is going on. Bala-hīnena... "Unless you become as strong as a tiger, you cannot realize yourself." This interpretation is going on. Bala-hīnena labhyaḥ. Therefore they are... Always they put this argument, that "Our countrymen is suffering. There is no food. First of all we must give them food, make them strong, stout. Then we shall talk about Kṛṣṇa consciousness." Do they not say like that?

Lecture on SB 1.5.22 -- Vrndavana, August 3, 1974:

And bala means strength. So śāstra says, nāyam ātmā bala-hīnena labhyaḥ: "One who is less strong, or one who has no support of the strength, then he cannot make any progress in spiritual self-realization." This is the Vedic injunction. So they interpret that unless you become physically strong, you cannot make any spiritual advancement. So...? But in the Western countries we have seen, so many people physically very strong, stout and strong. Practically everyone. But what is their self..., advancement in self-realization? So these things are going on. So bala means spiritual strength, not material strength. Nāyam ātmā bala-hīnena labhyaḥ. That means one must be spiritually strong. And that spiritually strong means to have good faith in Kṛṣṇa and guru. That is spiritual strength.

Lecture on SB 1.5.30 -- Vrndavana, August 11, 1974:

Unfortunately, it has become a fashion now to interpret Bhagavad-gītā in their own foolish way and mislead the public. This I have repeatedly spoken in many places, that in the Western countries so many swamis and yogis, they went there. For the last, at least, one hundred years. One hundred years, from India many swamis and yogis had been... Still they are going. But they could not turn even a single person to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Not a single person. Throughout the whole history of these hundred years of swamis going to the Western countries, but could not turn even a single soul to understand Kṛṣṇa. This is a fact. It is not that I am very proud. No. The truth must be spoken. Why they could not do so?

Lecture on SB 1.7.6 -- Hyderabad, August 18, 1976:

So we are missing our own culture that we do not take very much care to understand Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. We make our wrong interpretation and spoil the whole thing. These habits should be stopped. Otherwise our culture is almost already lost. Then this bhāratīya culture... It is very important culture. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said that

bhārata-bhūmite haila manuṣya-janma yāra

janma sārthaka kari' kara para-upakāra

(CC Adi 9.41)

Para-upakāra. The bhārata-bhūmi is meant for doing good to others. Bhārata-bhūmi is not meant for exploiting others. This is not bhāratīya mission. Para-upakāra. So every Indian...That is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's mission.

Lecture on SB 1.7.25 -- Vrndavana, September 22, 1976:

There is another verse in the Brahma-saṁhitā, that vedeṣu durlabhaḥ. You cannot understand Kṛṣṇa by studying Vedas, although Vedas means knowledge. And the ultimate knowledge—to understand Kṛṣṇa. So-called Vedanti..., you'll find so many Vedantists loitering on the street, but they do not understand Kṛṣṇa. This is their qualification. They interpret "Kṛṣṇa means this. Kṛṣ means this, ṇa means this," like that. When Vallabha Ācārya said to Caitanya Mahāprabhu, that "I have described Kṛṣṇa's meaning," Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately refused: "I do not know any meaning of Kṛṣṇa. I know Kṛṣṇa, Gopījana-vallabha, that's all. Gopījana-vallabha." What is the meaning of Kṛṣṇa? No interpretation, no imagination. Kṛṣṇa is Vṛndāvana-candra or Gopījana-vallabha, Giri-vara-dhārī, that's all. So we have to understand by sādhu-saṅga (CC Madhya 22.83). Then we can see sākṣāt Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on SB 1.7.36-37 -- Vrndavana, September 29, 1976:

That is pramatta, half-mad, crazy. Pramatta. We are thinking, dehāpatya-kalatrādiṣu (SB 2.1.4). I am thinking "I am very strong body..." (break) ...cannot achieve self-realization. Now some of our big sannyāsīs, he took it that unless you become very strong and stout by eating meat and exercise, gymnastics, you cannot understand spiritual life. This is their interpretation. But that is not the fact. Bala, bala means Balarāma. Do you think that because you are very strong and stout, a big wrestler with muscles, you'll live? No. For Yamarāja there is no consideration that "Here is a weak person, lean and thin, and here is a very strong person; therefore the strong person should be left over and the lean and thin will be taken to Yamarāja." No. When the time will come, the lean and thin may be spared, but the strong man may be immediately taken.

Lecture on SB 1.8.36 -- Los Angeles, April 28, 1973:

You have taken sannyāsa. It is very difficult to keep sannyāsa because there are so many attractions for the young man. So you hear Vedānta-sūtra." This, the hearing. So hearing. So hearing's so important. Even amongst the Māyāvādī school, they hear Vedānta-sūtra. We also hear, but we hear, hear real Vedānta-sūtra. Because they falsely interpret, their hearing is spoiled, but we don't interpret. We hear actually. Kṛṣṇa says that "I am the Supreme." We accept it. That is hearing. And if you interpret, "Oh, Kṛṣṇa means this, Kurukṣetra means this," that mean you're spoiling your time. Why this, that? As it is, hear as it is. Then the...

Lecture on SB 1.8.36 -- Los Angeles, April 28, 1973:

"You are explaining the meaning foolishly." He said later on that: "I see, I hear the verses just like sunshine. But you are explaining just like covering cloud. This is your explanation." Sun is ... Nobody requires any lamp to see the sun. Everyone can see. But if it is covered by the cloud, it is very difficult to see. So this Māyāvāda interpretation is, explanation, means covering the real meaning. That's all. They do so like that. They'll never accept the direct meaning. Kurukṣetra dharmakṣetra... Even big, big political leaders. They will cover: "Kurukṣetra means this, dharmakṣetra means this." No. Hearing should be ... Our policy is hearing the original, as it is. Then it will be effective.

Lecture on SB 1.8.46 -- Los Angeles, May 8, 1973:

For eating animal, they will philosophize that animal has no soul; therefore it can be killed. No. This is nonsense. Everyone has got soul. Even a small ant has got soul. But they have to kill. They have to eat. They are philosophizing different way. Lord Jesus Christ said, "Thou shalt not kill," and now they are interpreting, "Killing means murdering human being." But that is not in the Bible.

So they are manufacturing their own ways of understanding Bible and ethical principles. Therefore it is becoming valueless. It is becoming valueless. No value. One cannot change the words of the authority. If you believe in Lord Jesus Christ, you cannot make any change to your convenience.

Lecture on SB 1.10.5 -- Mayapura, June 20, 1973:

Is it not? They have taken it. And because the animals are given under the control of man, therefore man should open slaughterhouse and eat them? Suppose if somebody gives his son, "Sir, will you take my son? Keep him under your control." Does it mean I shall eat him? These rascals interpret in that way. Because the animals are given under the control of man, therefore there should be slaughterhouse, the animals will be killed, and they will eat. This is their interpretation of the Bible, is it not? Who knows Bible? Anyone? Nobody knows Bible? Have you forgotten? Anyway...

Lecture on SB 1.10.13 -- Mayapura, June 26, 1973:

So there are rules and regulations, how to have sex life. So... There are two kinds of association with women, vaidha and avaidha. Vaidha means according to śāstra, and avaidha means without any restriction, without any restriction of the śāstra. So asat, eka strī-saṅgī. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said. And the sahajiyās, rascals, they interpret: asat eka strī-saṅgī. One who has got only one wife, he's asat. One must have many wives. The sahajiyās, you know. They keep so many women, like monkeys, in their company. You see, they have interpreted in this way. Asat eka strī-saṅgī.

So we, we, śāstra restricts, but rascals, they interpret in a different way, and they enjoy. The real purpose comes... Just like what is that sannyāsī in Australia who wrote against... What is the name?

Lecture on SB 1.10.13 -- Mayapura, June 26, 1973:

So that is their interpretation. Marriage, Vedic śāstra enjoins marriage, and it is for prostitution. Just see the interpretation. All the great ṛṣis, they recommended: "Yes, you can go on, prostitution, with your prostitution, under the sanction of the śāstra." No, it is not that. The real purpose is to restrict. Just like meat-eating. Meat-eating is recommended in Vedic literature. There is kālī-pūjā. Kālī-pūjā. By sacrificing one goat before Goddess Kālī. Goddess Kālī's worshiped on the amāvasyā. Amāvasyā takes place once in a month. Therefore these rascals who are meat-eaters, they'll be restricted. If they accept the śāstra, "No, no, if we eat meat from the butcher's place, then we shall be sinful. Let us eat meat..."

Lecture on SB 1.15.30 -- Los Angeles, December 8, 1973:

Now Arjuna said that science was spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. If we read Bhagavad-gītā, then we must follow the person of Arjuna, because Arjuna directly heard Bhagavad-gītā from the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And he says that this science, gītaṁ bhagavatā. So why there should be interpretation? Because the person who heard directly from Bhagavān, the Supreme Per..., he said that this is spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So one who is hearing directly, he's saying something, but you are saying something. You have no right. This is called paramparā system. The person who heard Bhagavad-gītā directly from Kṛṣṇa, whatever he says, that is to be accepted. You cannot interpret. This is the paramparā system.

Lecture on SB 1.16.36 -- Tokyo, January 30, 1974:

Every instruction is like that. We should follow the instruction, and if you cannot understand, then consult the spiritual master. Not to give up this association of the spiritual master and interpret in your own way. That is rascaldom. Don't do that. It is said in the Bhagavad-gītā,

tad viddhi praṇipātena

paripraśnena sevayā

upadekṣyanti te jñānaṁ

jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ

(BG 4.34)

If there is any doubt in understanding the Vedic literature, then you try to understand from the person who knows it, tattva-darśī, who has seen actually the truth. Upadekṣyanti te jñānaṁ jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ. One who has actually seen the truth. And, how to approach him?

Lecture on SB 1.16.36 -- Tokyo, January 30, 1974:

Therefore, yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādaḥ **, we have to please the spiritual master by service and surrender, and then it will be very nice position. If the spiritual master sees that the disciple is a surrendered soul, and he's rendering service to his best capacity, then the answer will be very liberal and convincing, and he will be very glad to answer the question, if it is supported by these two things: surrender, and paripraśnena, and sevayā. Tad viddhi praṇipātena (BG 4.34). The first beginning is praṇipāta. And what is this, that I give up the company of my spiritual master and I invent my own ways of life and own interpretation? That will not help. That will not...

Lecture on SB 2.3.10 -- Los Angeles, May 28, 1972:

After being disgusted that "I worked so hard throughout my whole life. I could not get peace. Therefore it is false." Jagan mithyā. Mithyā means false. This is Śaṅkarācārya philosophy. Jagan mithyā. Mithyā means false. Brahma satyam. "Now let me search out where is Brahma and become one with him." That is also another labor. Speculating. They have to interpret all these Vedic literature to make God dead, void, impersonal, nullified. So they have to gather their arguments. That is another labor, hard labor. So they are also working hard. Yogis, they want to show some magic: "I can walk on the water. I can fly in the air without any airship. I can go this planet, that planet." Yogis can do that. They have got this magical power. "I can create immediately gold." And if you can show these magical feats, immediately you get so many...

Lecture on SB 2.3.11-12 -- Los Angeles, May 29, 1972:

Only a pure devotee of the Lord can show one the right way of progressive life. Otherwise both the materialistic way of life, without any information of God or the demigods, and the life engaged in the worship of demigods, in pursuit of temporary material enjoyments, are different phases of phantasmagoria. They are nicely explained in the Bhagavad-gītā also, but the Bhagavad-gītā can be understood in the association of pure devotees only, and not by the interpretations of politicians or dry philosophical speculators.

Lecture on SB 2.4.1 -- Los Angeles, June 24, 1972:

The paramparā system means... Just like we claim paramparā system from Kṛṣṇa. So whatever Kṛṣṇa says or He said 5,000 years ago, we are repeating the same thing. That is called paramparā system. Not that "The world has changed. Scientific advancement is very great. Now we can interpret in this way and that way." This is all nonsense. All nonsense. You cannot change a single alphabet. They are all unmistakable. They cannot be changed. So that is niścayam ātmanaḥ.

Lecture on SB 2.4.1 -- Los Angeles, June 24, 1972:

If you hear from the right person, then tattva-niścayam, then positively you can realize self. And if you hear from some rascals, they have no connection with Vaiyāsaki, simply by dint of mental speculation, interpreting, "I think this may be this, I think this,"... What you are, nonsense? You think? We don't accept such nonsense things. It must be positively authorized. As it is said here, vaiyāsaker iti vacas tattva-niścayam ātmanaḥ. When we hear from the right person...

Lecture on SB 2.9.7 -- Tokyo, April 24, 1972:

I think the Christian philosophy is like that. Christ, son, and God, Holy Ghost—they are simultaneously one and different? Is that? So that is the position. Sākṣād-dharitvena samasta-śāstrair uktas tathā bhāvyata eva sadbhiḥ, kintu prabhor yaḥ priya eva tasya **. So we can interpret... When the Christian people say that... Just like they say "only son." So we can interpret... Of course, we are not going to interpret. We can take it that anyone who becomes confidential... Just like father position. He has got many sons. One son who is very obedient, he says, "He is my only son, and others not sons." Does he not, father say, sometimes? "Actually he is my son." Sometimes father says like that. But that does not mean that he has got only one son. He has got many sons, but all of them are useless, worthless. He is only bona fide.

Lecture on SB 2.9.7 -- Tokyo, April 24, 1972:

"Then why you are restricting, limited one son?" He could not answer. You know that? Why you are limiting? He is unlimited. The ordinary person can beget hundreds of thousands. Why God, unlimited, He should be restricted to one son? The interpretation should be... Anyway, that Tulasī dāsa says that if he is devotee, then he is son. Otherwise it is urine. The God has begotten many sons... Just like... The only worthy son was Jesus Christ—you can interpret it like that—because he was giving service to the Lord, to the father. He brought the message of father.

Lecture on SB 2.9.7 -- Tokyo, April 24, 1972:

So our interpretation is like that, not that God has got only one son, but he is the only worthy son. All are mut. Anyone who is not God conscious, Kṛṣṇa conscious, mut put(?). Then? Read the purport.

Lecture on SB 3.25.13 -- Bombay, November 13, 1974:

Because we don't manufacture ideas. We take the idea and the words delivered by the Supreme Person, Kṛṣṇa, or His incarnation, or His representative. His representative does not say anything which the master does not say. Representative is very easy. You can become representative of Kṛṣṇa if you do not interpret Kṛṣṇa's words in your whimsical way. Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya: (BG 7.7) "There is no more superior authority than Me." And if you take it as it is, and if you speak to the people that "There is no more superior authority than Kṛṣṇa," then you become guru. You become guru. You don't change. Then you become guru. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has instructed this. Āmāra ājñāya guru hañā tāra' ei deśa (CC Madhya 7.128). His, He was preaching. So He was preaching everyone, from country to country. Of course, He did not go outside India. Within India.

Lecture on SB 3.25.31 -- Bombay, December 1, 1974:

So our this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is to present the Kṛṣṇa consciousness, or the conclusion given by Kṛṣṇa, or the conclusion in the Bhagavad-gītā, in this āmnāya Sāṅkhya philosophy, disciple after disciple, not that "I know little more ABCD. I am, therefore, a big scholar. I can interpret Bhagavad-gītā in my own way." This is useless. This is useless. You cannot make your own comment. But that is not also good. So many commentaries which have been made without this āmnāya, Sāṅkhya process, they are useless. There is no effect. This is very essential.

Lecture on SB 3.25.31 -- Bombay, December 1, 1974:

Aham ādiḥ: "I am the original." Everyone has learned from Kṛṣṇa. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said, tene brahma hṛdā ādi-kavaye. So Kṛṣṇa is teaching personally just like Kapiladeva is teaching personally. So you take Kapiladeva's philosophy, Sāṅkhya philosophy, Kṛṣṇa's philosophy, Bhagavad-gītā, but try to understand as He says. Don't interpret in the wrong way. So this is āmnāya-tattvam. So if we fix up the idea how to receive transcendental knowledge and how to practice it, if we simply take the instruction of these mahājana, āmnāya, so that will be very beneficial and easy also.

Lecture on SB 3.25.37 -- Bombay, December 6, 1974:

We are preaching all over the world that if you read Bhagavad-gītā, you read it as it is and accept it as it is. Otherwise don't create foolish anymore. We have produced many foolish person but misguiding them by misinterpreting this Bhagavad-gītā. Stop this business. And if you believe, you have to believe like this. You cannot interpret, that is not possible. Why you should interpret? It is a fact that Brahmā's āyuḥ, his duration of life, is very, very big. Not only Brahmā's āyuḥ, even if you go higher planetary system... You are going to the moon planet. There are living entities. I do not know why they say there is no living being. Where they are going? But if we believe our śāstra, the moon planet is one of the heavenly planets, and the duration of life in the moon planet is ten thousands of years. And their year means our six months equal to their one day. That is called divya. In this way that high...

Lecture on SB 3.25.39-40 -- Bombay, December 8, 1974:

So one who knows Kṛṣṇa perfectly, he is Kṛṣṇa's representative. And to know Kṛṣṇa is very difficult task? No. Everything is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. But if you, like a rascal, interpret in a different way, then you are not a guru. You are a goru, then you are animal. You are guru so long you take Bhagavad-gītā as it is.

Lecture on SB 3.26.1 -- Bombay, December 13, 1974:

When God gives His reality, identification, and it is recorded in the śāstra, not by any loafer class writer but like Vyāsadeva, and we take it fictitious. Just see our position-Vyāsadeva has bothered his brain to write something fictitious! Just see how low-grade persons we are! We don't believe writing of Vyāsadeva. Or sometimes we say, "No, no, this was not written by Vyāsadeva. It is interpretation." If it is interpretation, then why the ācāryas have accepted? They're also fools-Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī... They have made commentary on the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and they mention, they have accepted, "Yes. Kṛṣṇa has sixteen thousand wives." So Vyāsadeva has written and the ācāryas have accepted. Then I have become such a great scholar that I say it is fictitious. And we have to believe these rascals.

Lecture on SB 3.26.1 -- Bombay, December 13, 1974:

Bhagavān says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī mām... (BG 18.65). We are canvassing, "My dear sir, you just become a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. You always think of Kṛṣṇa." Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhaktaḥ. We say, "You just think of Kṛṣṇa." The same thing. There is no change. We do not interpret any way, "This man-manāḥ means this, and mad-bhaktaḥ means that." No. We don't do that. We present as it is. Therefore if Kṛṣṇa sees that "One is presenting My message as I have given," then He is pleased. Therefore, it is said, kintu prabhor yaḥ priya eva tasya. He has become very dear because he does not, nonsensically, he does not nonsensically change the meaning, that "This meaning's that, this meaning's that." Why? When Kṛṣṇa has said, that is everything perfect.

Lecture on SB 3.26.10 -- Bombay, December 22, 1974:

At the end, he is accepting, "Kṛṣṇa, You are Para-brahman." So if we are part and parcel of Para-brahman, then we must be Brahman. Where is the difficulty? So this brahmāham, brahmāsmi, this Brahman realization, can be understood in a moment if you believe Bhagavad-gītā as it is. But if you foolishly interpret in this way and that way, then it will take millions of years. You will not understand what is Bhagavad-gītā, what is God, what is... But if you take it as it is, then immediately you can understand that you are Brahman. There is no difficulty.

So what is the duty of the part and parcel? That is also very easy to understand. Just like this finger is the part and parcel of my body. So what is the duty of the finger? I ask the finger, "Please come here." It comes immediately. I ask the finger, "Come here." So that means service. Therefore part and parcel's duty is...

Lecture on SB 5.5.1 -- Vrndavana, October 23, 1976:

So in this way if we lead our life, then this life will be successful, and then the result will be yasmād brahma-saukhyam (SB 5.5.1). Brahma-saukhyam. Here brahma-saukhyam may be interpreted, as Māyāvādī says, brahma-sukha, brahma-lim. This is also brahma-lin, brahma-sukha, but it is not the Māyāvādī philosophy. Māyāvādī philosophy is to kill himself, to become one with Brahman. So if, suppose I have to eat something to enjoy. So I can eat. That is enjoyment. But if I lose my existence, I become the food, then where is the enjoyment? No. The enjoyment is: "The food is there, I am there, I shall eat and enjoy." That means dvaita. Monism is not enjoyment, and therefore they fall down: āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho (SB 10.2.32). Brahma-sukha, do not think to become Brahman or to become one with Brahman... That is not sukha. That they do not know.

Lecture on SB 5.5.1-2 -- London (Tittenhurst), September 13, 1969:

That is not human society. That is the idea. Because the brāhmaṇas, they will give you good information of spiritual life, and cows will give you the best food you can have within this material world. That is the real interpretation of go-brāhmaṇa-hitāya ca. If you have simply a cow and... The great sages, just see. A child born, it lives simply on cow's milk. First of all, mother's milk. Milk for six months. Then when it is a little grown up, you simply give her sufficient milk, oh, she'll be very stout and strong. Then supply it little grains, fruits. That's all.

Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 12, 1975:

...interpretation... First thing is that why interpretation if the meaning is straight? Just like in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, dharma-kṣetre kurukṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ (BG 1.1), and somebody's interpreting dharmakṣetra means this body. Why this interpretation? Eh? The dharmakṣetra, Kurukṣetra, is still existing, the station is there, people are going as dharmakṣetra. Kurukṣetre dharmam ācaret, this is the Vedic instruction, that everyone should go to Kurukṣetra and perform ritualistic duties. That is being done, and it is written dharmakṣetre kurukṣetre, why interpretation? (exchange with a guest in Hindi) You are more than Kṛṣṇa? You are so... You have got capacity to speak more than Kṛṣṇa? (exchange in Hindi) Interpretation... (exchange in Hindi) We are discussing the same thing.

Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 12, 1975:

We are discussing the same thing. We go or not go. (everyone laughs) You are a young man. Therefore I'm requesting you, "Don't be misled by these blind leaders. Take Bhagavad-gītā as it is and you'll be happy." (exchange in Hindi) The meaning is clear, very clear. No question of interpretation. Hare Kṛṣṇa.

mahat-sevāṁ dvāram āhur vimuktes

tamo-dvāraṁ yoṣitāṁ saṅgi-saṅgam

mahāntas te sama-cittāḥ praśāntā

vimanyavaḥ suhṛdaḥ sādhavo ye

(SB 5.5.2)

So the first proposal was that this human form of life is not to be wasted like cats and dogs. This is the first proposal by Ṛṣabha. He was advising His sons, "My dear boys, don't waste your, this valuable life like cats and dogs and hogs."

Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 12, 1975:

All the Upaniṣad, Vedic śāstra is spoken in a very short, cream Bhagavad-gītā, and the Supreme Personality speaking Himself. So we should take it very seriously. Unfortunately, although Bhagavad-gītā is spoken in India, and there are many so-called students of Bhagavad-gītā, but they're interpreting in their own way, misleading people. Don't be misled in that way. Take Bhagavad-gītā as it is; then it will automatically act. The medicine, as directed by the physician, you should take. You should not manufacture your own way of doses. Suppose physician says that "You take five drops of this medicine, mix with water and take it." You have to follow. If you say, "No, let me be cured immediately. Let me take hundred drops" or "one drop." No. That will not help you. Similarly, you should read Bhagavad-gītā as it is prescribed by the physician, Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Vrndavana, October 24, 1976:

"This kind of talking there will be no benefit," then he became His disciple: śiṣyas te 'ham śādhi māṁ prapannam (BG 2.7). "There is no more discussion. Now I accept You as my guru."

Guru means whatever instruction he'll give, we have to accept without any argument. Vedic knowledge is like that. You cannot interpret. As it is, you have to accept. Similarly guru's word also you have to accept. No argument. That is Vedic knowledge. That is the Vedic system. This example we have given many times. Just like this cow dung. Cow dung is the stool of an animal. So the stool of an animal is most impure thing. As soon as you touch. Even your own stool. You may be very learned scholar or devotee, but that does not meant you can touch your own stool and remain purified. No. Immediately you have to take bath.

Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Vrndavana, October 24, 1976:

We are daily blowing the conchshell—because the Vedic instruction. So there is no argument. If you accept Vedic instruction, you have to accept it as it is.

Therefore we are protesting to all these rascals who are making interpretation of Bhagavad-gītā, "You rascals, you cannot do anything. You have to accept Kṛṣṇa's word. That is Vedic knowledge. And if, you rascal, if you interpret, then you are lost and everything is lost." Yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa.

Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Vrndavana, October 24, 1976:

Otherwise what was the use of Kṛṣṇa speaking again to Arjuna? Because Bhagavad-gītā was there current, but Kṛṣṇa said because the paramparā system is lost, every rascal is interpreting. This is the system always. As soon as some time goes away, so many rascals come and they interpret Bhagavad-gītā in their own rascaldom way. That is lost. Sa kāleneha yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. Therefore I am advising you again. You take it. So if we take Bhagavad-gītā in that way—or any śāstra—through the paramparā channel, then it is all right. Just like this example. This is Vedic instruction, Vedic order: "Yes, cow dung is pure." We have to take it. This is paramparā. "Yes, conchshell is pure. Although it is bone, never mind. It is pure." The order.

Lecture on SB 5.5.14 -- Vrndavana, November 2, 1976:

Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that "Under My instruction you become guru." But the instruction is Kṛṣṇa's, the same instruction, yāre dekha tāre kaha kṛṣṇa-upadeśa. Caitanya Mahāprabhu also does not deviate from kṛṣṇa-upadeśa, what to speak of others. And those rascals who are deviating from the instruction of Kṛṣṇa, how he can become guru? They are interpreting in a different way, how they can become guru? That is not guru. We should simply remember this fact, whether this person is speaking the same thing as Kṛṣṇa says, as Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, as Rāmānujācārya says, even Śaṅkarācārya.

Lecture on SB 5.5.14 -- Vrndavana, November 2, 1976:

And this jugglery of words, grammatical jugglery, will not help you at the time of death. Nahi nahi rakṣati dukṛn-karaṇe(?). If you misinterpret that "With this grammatical addition or grammatical alteration this meaning can be derived." No. That is mal-interpretation. Real understanding is bhaja govindam. Govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **. Lord Brahmā, he also says, govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi. And Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, he is incarnation of Śaṅkara, he also saying, govindam, bhaja govindam, bhaja govindam, bhaja govindam. And we are following the same thing, so that is guru-paramparā, that is real knowledge. So don't approach a cheater, but actually approach a teacher, not a cheater. Then bhakti-yoga will be... That teacher is guru, and he is representative of Kṛṣṇa. He does not say anything else.

Lecture on SB 5.5.14 -- Vrndavana, November 2, 1976:

When bhakti, bhajata sukti(?). Bhaja means sevayā. Tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā (BG 4.34). So we have to understand this bhakti-yoga by bhaktyānuvṛtyā, not otherwise. Not that I am very learned scholar, I can give a different interpretation and... No, that is not bhakti. Bhaktyānuvṛtyā vitṛṣṇayā dvandva-titikṣayā ca.

Then mat-karmabhir mat-kathayā ca nityam. This is a very important word nityam, mat-kathayā. The Bhagavān says, "My words," so kṛṣṇa-kathā mat-kathā. Kṛṣṇa says, mat-kathā. We can say, kṛṣṇa-kathā. So kṛṣṇa-kathā, Kṛṣṇa is speaking personally Bhagavad-gītā, this is kṛṣṇa-kathā.

Lecture on SB 5.5.27 -- Vrndavana, November 14, 1976:

He will simply misrepresent. They will simply mislead the persons. You see so many big, big politicians, scholars, simply misleading people from Bhagavad-gītā. Bhagavad-gītā is spoken on the battlefield, and they want to prove that it is nonviolence. In this way people are being misled.

Therefore avoid this rascal process, to read something and interpret in a different way. Caitanya Mahāprabhu wanted to do that. Guru more mūrkha dekhi karila śāsana. So we should not try to become very learned scholar by misreading the Vedic literature. Take the instruction of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Not Caitanya Mahāprabhu—the śāstra, the Bṛhad-nāradīya Purāṇa. Sādhu śāstra guru vākya. Sādhu will not speak anything which is not in the śāstra. That is sādhu.

Lecture on SB 5.5.32 -- Vrndavana, November 19, 1976:

They got the chance of understanding Kṛṣṇa, but they do not know. And the so-called rascal leaders, they are also misleading them, that "There was no Battle of Kurukṣetra. There was no instruction like that. It is all mythology, and we can utilize it for our political purposes but it has no value. I can interpret in my own way; you can interpret in your own way. Actually, this instruction has no value." Yata mata tata patha. "You can interpret in your own way; I can interpret..." In this way things are going on. This is the position.

Lecture on SB 5.6.7 -- Vrndavana, November 29, 1976:

You are this." Sarvam etān ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi keśava. Then he understands. He is directly understanding. And you take the version of Arjuna. Arjuna says, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma (BG 10.12). Why you, rascal, interpret in a different way, rascal? What right you have got? "My Kṛṣṇa is like that. My Kṛṣṇa..." What right you hve got? Kṛṣṇa says like this; one who listen to Kṛṣṇa about Kṛṣṇa, he says like that. You rascal, why do you interpret in a different way? This is going on.

Lecture on SB 6.1.14 -- Bombay, November 10, 1970:

That's all. And our authority is Kṛṣṇa, mainly. Yāre dekha tāre kaha 'kṛṣṇa'-upa... That is the spiritual master. Who does not add or subtract from the talks of Kṛṣṇa, he is spiritual master. One who adds and subtracts according to his whims, he is not spiritual master. He is not bona fide spiritual master. "I, my opinion..." "I give this interpretation..." He is not authorized. You are lawyer, you know better than me. In your law court you cannot change the law by your opinion. That is not possible.

Lecture on SB 6.1.14 -- Bombay, November 10, 1970:

That is another thing, but that is judged by the expert lawyer that your interpretation is right. And when interpreted. Not ordinarily interpret everything. When it is not distinct. The law point, when it is not distinct then interpretation required. When it is distinct, is there any necessity of interpretation? It is clear. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa says, "I am God. I am the Supreme." So how you can interpret that "No, no, not Kṛṣṇa. Something within Kṛṣṇa." Dr. Radhakrishnan says like that. Yes. That is foolishness. Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad... (BG 18.65).

Lecture on SB 6.1.17 -- Denver, June 30, 1975:

"These rascals are doing. They cannot kill me, but they are thinking that I will be killed. So they are committing offense." So this is toleration, and kāruṇikāḥ. Similarly, there are many examples. Titikṣavaḥ kāruṇikāḥ, and suhṛdaḥ sarva-dehinām: (SB 3.25.21) friend of all living entities. Lord Christ said, "Thou shall not kill." He never said that... Now they are interpreting in a different way: "The animal has no soul, and you can kill animals and keep slaughterhouse." So who is a Christian? I do not know who is a Christian. They profess to be Christian. It is very difficult to find out a true Christian who is strictly following the words of Lord Jesus Christ. So he is a good example of sādhu.

Lecture on SB 6.1.19 -- Honolulu, May 19, 1976:

Even if you do not understand, your dull brain, but we have to accept the words of Kṛṣṇa. That is the critical point. If we take Kṛṣṇa's instruction, everything will be solved. There will be no problem.

Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā As It Is to induce people to take as it is. Don't make any amendment, interpretation. As Kṛṣṇa says, you do it; then your life is successful. The instruction is there. It is not that we are manufacturing some ideas. No. That is not our business. We are following the same principle as Kṛṣṇa said to the sun-god:

Lecture on SB 6.1.20 -- Chicago, July 4, 1975:

And this Kurukṣetra is dharma-kṣetra. Not because the fight was there and Kṛṣṇa was on the battlefield, therefore it is called dharma-kṣetra. Sometimes it is interpreted like that. But actually Kurukṣetra was dharma-kṣetra since very, very long time. In the Vedas it is stated, kuru-kṣetre dharmam ācaret: "If one wants to execute ritualistic ceremony, he should go to Kurukṣetra." And it is the system still now in India, if there is some disagreement or quarrel between two parties, so still they would go to the temple—temple is dharma-kṣetra—so that one may not dare to speak lie in front of the Deity. This was still going on. Even one is very low in mentality, still, if he is challenged that "You are talking this false.

Lecture on SB 6.1.21 -- Honolulu, May 21, 1976:

So he knows what he wants to speak. What others have got the right? Just like Bhagavad-gītā. The purpose of Bhagavad-gītā is known by Kṛṣṇa. Why the rascals comment in different way? They may write their rascal philosophy other... Why they touch Bhagavad-gītā and give different interpretation? They have no right. I have written a book; I have got my purpose. Why you should poke your nose and make it a different purpose? This is very mischievous rascaldom. So we want to stop this. We present Bhagavad-gītā as it is, as Kṛṣṇa says. We don't allow any rascal to comment upon Bhagavad-gītā in a different way. That is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. This is very natural. If you have got a different type of philosophy, you can write.

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

When these things are there, the rascals will say, "Oh, these are all legends." When God displays Himself as God, the rascals take it as legend. Just see. They do not believe in the śāstras. They interpret in a different way. Is it not? Yes. And this is going on. And they are supposed to be... What is their interpretation about this Govardhana Hill? Do you know? Kṛṣṇa's lifting the Govardhana Hill, what, how they interpret it? I know, the Māyāvādīs, they do not accept. Or "Kṛṣṇa is ordinary human being." The Ārya-samājīs and others, they take it as legend. But the ācāryas, they do not take it as legend. Therefore we have to follow the ācāryas.

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

Guest (3): But one who is self-realized, he interprets them out, the ślokas or...

Prabhupāda: There is no interpretation. Kṛṣṇa says. In the Bhāgavata it is said that He lifted the mountain just like a child snatch one flower or the..., what is called? Yes. Mushroom. Yes. So easily. They do not believe.

Guest (3): No, but in Bhāgavata there are many ślokas interpreted by many teachers and...

Prabhupāda: Those who believe in Bhāgavata, they do not interpret. Those who do not believe in Bhāgavata, they interpret.

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

What is the difficulty to understand Kurukṣetra is a religious place, acknowledged by the Vedas, and it is going on still? Why do they interpret, "Kurukṣetra means this body"? Is it not rascal? Why there is interpretation when you understand a thing very clearly? Eh?

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

Not taken. It is still there. Why do you interpret that this is body? Is it not rascaldom? No devotee, no ācārya has done this, but these modern so-called scholars and leaders, they have done it. Are they not rascals? What do you think? Eh?

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

And why do they...? What is the difficulty? Dharma-kṣetra kuru-kṣetra, is that a very difficult Sanskrit? Now, there is no question. Even in... If you do not understand Sanskrit, what is the difficulty to understand dharma-kṣetra? Is it not a Hindi word? Kurukṣetra is a name of place. So what is the difficulty? Why do you interpret that Kurukṣetra means this body? This rascaldom has killed the whole spiritual atmosphere of India. They are responsible, these rascal politicians, the rascal scholars, so-called. Actually if we want good of the people, these rascals should be disclosed and people should come back. We should... Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Why we should interpret? You know, you, as a lawyer. When there is legal point, if it is not clear, one lawyer is trying to extract some meaning and the other lawyer is extract... It is... After all, the judges (indistinct) give the judgment. So this interpretation between the two lawyers are there when the subject matter is not very clear. Is it not?

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

So that imperfectness you must find. But I am speaking of the procedure. You have to speak on the lawbooks. You cannot... In the law court you cannot speak beyond the lawbooks. And the lawbooks... Suppose one section is not very clear. You fight: "This should be interpreted like this. This should be interpreted..." I am taking that procedure. But when it is clear, do you interpret?

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

Prabhupāda: That's not possible. Similarly, Bhagavad-gītā, it is clear, dharma-kṣetra kuru-kṣetra. Why these rascals say that Kurukṣetra means body?

Guest (3): Even according to the rules of interpretation, in the books it is stated, "When the words are clear, you should..."

Prabhupāda: That is eternally fact.

Guest (3): (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes.

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

Guest (3): If the language is absolutely clear, the language should be interpreted... (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: Yes. So when the language is clear it is... Just like anything you take, all these Vedic literatures, simply by interpretation they have played havoc. Now, this Vedānta-sūtra, Vedānta, is accepted as the supreme authority of Vedic literature. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the sutra, that janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) "The Absolute Truth must be the original source of everything." There is no question of interpretation. This is the clear meaning. Janmādi. Janma means birth and... Janma, sthiti and laya. There are three words in this material world. The things come out, just like this body has come out from the womb of my mother. It stays for some time, it grows, it gives some by-products, then it becomes old and again vanishes. So therefore janmādy asya: (SB 1.1.1)

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

So therefore janmādy asya: (SB 1.1.1) "Beginning from birth up to the annihilation, everything is emanation from the Absolute Truth." So is not that very clear? Absolute Truth must be that which is the source of everything and reservoir of everything and who is maintaining everything. That is the meaning of... Now, Bhāgavata, because it is interpretation of the Vedānta-sūtra, it begins from that sutra, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Now, how that janmādy asya yataḥ? It is explained, janmādy asya yataḥ anvayād itarataś ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ. If the original source... How the characteristics of the original source should be? The original source must be cognizant indirectly and directly of everything.

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

And the real commentary and explanation is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, of Vedānta. But these Vedantists, so-called Vedantists, they do not read Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Even read, they make a different interpretation, because to make them popular they have to go through Bhāgavata sometimes. I see Akṣajānanda also tries to explain. But they explain in their own way. Just like "This Kurukṣetra, this body, and this means..." I, in a... Long ago in Bombay this Akṣajānanda explaining one śloka. I just forget, but I remember his interpretation, that "When I am satisfied, God is satisfied." He explained like that. And he is passing on as a great scholar and great sannyāsa.

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

And that is stated next, that he used to live on these principles—beg, borrow, steal and gambling—and he was degraded. And how he was degraded? That will be explained. So people do not take care of their śāstras. They make their own interpretation and therefore India's position is so fallen. They are guided. The great ṛṣis and great sages, they have given them guidance. Vyāsadeva has given guidance. Lokasyājānato vidvāṁś cakre sātvata-saṁhitā. It is stated. "People are rascals, fools. In order to teach them nicely, this highest learned personality, Vyāsadeva, created the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam." Lokasya ajānataḥ. Ajānataḥ means rascals who has no knowledge.

Lecture on SB 6.1.37 -- San Francisco, July 19, 1975:

So therefore Vedas, they are not man-made books. Veda, apauruṣeya. Apauruṣeya means not made by... We should not take Vedas as ordinary mental speculation book. No. It is perfect knowledge. It is perfect knowledge. And one has to take as it is, without any adulteration, interpretation. So it is spoken by God. Therefore Bhagavad-gītā is also Veda. It is spoken by Kṛṣṇa. So you cannot make any addition, alteration. You must take it as it is. Then you get the right knowledge. Vedas, how... The example is given. Perhaps you know several times that the Vedas, how it should be accepted as it is without interpretation. Just like Vedas says that if you touch stool, immediately you have to take your bath. You have become impure. This is Vedic injunction. If you touch bone, then you have become impure. You have to take your bath immediately, full.

Lecture on SB 6.1.37 -- San Francisco, July 19, 1975:

You cannot argue. There is no scope of argument. Whatever is said, you have to accept. Otherwise how Vedas become authority? You can change in your own way.

So therefore we say that if you want to take benefit by reading Bhagavad-gītā, then you should accept it as it is said. Don't try to interpret foolishly. Then you will never get the benefit. That is our propaganda. And people are very against us: "No, I am a scholar. I am a philosopher. I can interpret in a way." We say, "No, sir, you cannot do that." This is our propaganda. Veda-praṇihito dharmaḥ.

Lecture on SB 6.1.39-40 -- Surat, December 21, 1970:

Here, as the assistants of Yamarāja says, that veda-praṇihito dharmo... Dharma means what is stated in the Vedas. And Vedas means the Supreme Personality of Godhead, sākṣād, directly. Just like when you speak, when you speak or hear Bhagavad-gītā, immediately we should know—at least this vision we take—that Kṛṣṇa is directly speaking. And if we interpret, then the whole thing is lost. That is not Bhagavad-gītā, and that is going on, malinterpretation of Bhagavad-gītā. Everyone is taking Bhagavad-gītā, and he is interpreting in his own way. So that is not Bhagavad-gītā. Bhagavad-gītā means as Kṛṣṇa says. Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). But a commentator, big commentator, says, "Oh, it is not to Kṛṣṇa, to the person." Just see. This kind of commentary is going on.

Lecture on SB 6.1.40 -- Los Angeles, June 6, 1976:

Because Bhagavad-gītā and the speaker of Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa, they are identical. So you cannot change the words of Bhagavad-gītā. That is foolishness. Anyone who changes the orders and the words of Bhagavad-gītā, they are rascal, they'll not get any benefit. Because you cannot correct Kṛṣṇa, what Kṛṣṇa says or God says. That is not in your power. So these rascals, they want to interpret, "This is like this, this is this, I think it is this." No. Kṛṣṇa did not live for you, for your thinking rascally. No. Kṛṣṇa is completely learned. Whatever He has said, it is perfectly in order. You cannot change.

Lecture on SB 6.1.50 -- Detroit, August 3, 1975:

Kṛṣṇa left it for reading it by everyone. Any common man can understand. Dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ (BG 1.1). This is the beginning. Any common man can understand. The Kurukṣetra is still there, and it is dharma-kṣetra. Still people go there to take bath in the Brahma-kunda during lunar and solar eclipse. It is a great dharma-kṣetra. But they will interpret, "Dharma-kṣetra kuru-kṣetra means this body." Where they get this meaning? Where is the dictionary? No, because he is scholar, he has invented some meaning. This is going on, and people are misled.

Lecture on SB 6.2.3 -- Vrndavana, September 7, 1975:

As I instructed My dear friend Arjuna, they will also take advantage and become free from the clutches of death." This is the purpose of Bhagavad-gītā. Bhāgavata-dharma. Unfortunately, people have become so rascal that they do not care for this Bhagavad-gītā instruction. And if anyone poses himself to be a very good scholar of Bhagavad-gītā, he interprets in his own way, he misleads himself and misleads others also. This is the position. Therefore my request to you all who are in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement—do not be a bluffer. Behave in your life how to become Kṛṣṇa conscious and teach others. Then the whole world will be benefited, and the Yamadūta will not come to them.

Lecture on SB 6.2.13 -- Vrndavana, September 15, 1975:

If we neglect the orders of guru and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, then it is aparādha, offense. Guru-avajñā śruti-śāstra-nindanam. The Vedic literature, whatever injunction is there, if I don't obey or I decry—"Oh, there are so many rules. It is not possible"—śruti-śāstra nindanam. Nāma artha-vāda. We interpret in our own way about the nāma. And to consider the holy name of Viṣṇu and other name equally potent, that is nāmāparādha. And nāmnād balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhiḥ. And because one is chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, he thinks, "Even if I do something sinful, it will be counteracted." That is aparādha. And to instruct to a person who has no interest in hari-kīrtana, that is also aparādha. So we should not be very much interested to preach Kṛṣṇa consciousness if one is not very much interested. But tactfully, if you can, just try to give him a book. In this way there are ten kinds of offenses. We have discussed many times, and I think all of you know it.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

Consciousness, you must come to the perfection of consciousness that I am eternally related with Kṛṣṇa and God... (break) So Vedic literature does not say like that. It is order. You have to accept it. If you do not understand, try to understand it. That is a different thing. Just like in the Bhagavad-gītā there is no question of interpretation. In the beginning it is said

dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre

samavetā yuyutsavaḥ

māmakāḥ pāṇḍavāś caiva

kim akurvata sañjaya

(BG 1.1)

"My dear Sañjaya," Dhṛtarāṣṭra is asking his private secretary, Mr. Sañjaya, "my sons and my brother's sons, Pāṇḍava..." His brother's name was Pandu, therefore they are Pāṇḍava. Māmakāḥ means "my sons."

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

Dharmakṣetra, that is a religious place, place of pilgrimage. Still, people go for religious performances. In the Vedas it is stated, kuru-kṣetre dharmam ācaret. One should perform religious rituals in the Kurukṣetra. So where is the scope for interpretation? Interpretation means when you cannot understand something. Then you can interpret. But here Kurukṣetra you can understand, dharma-kṣetra you can understand, māmakāḥ you can understand, pāṇḍava you can understand, they assembled for fighting you can understand. Why do you interpret? What is the necessity of interpretation? That means he wants to show that he has got some better intelligence than the speaker of the Bhagavad-gītā. We do not accept such things, nonsense. (break)

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

If you have to learn Bhagavad-gītā, then you have to learn Bhagavad-gītā as Kṛṣṇa speaks or as Arjuna understands. Just like if you take a medicine bottle. The direction, as it is stated in the bottle, you have to take medicine in that way. You cannot make your own direction, interpretation. (break) Nonsense. We don't accept. (break) We are publishing one book, Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. It has been taken by one great publisher, Macmillan Company, and we'll have it by the month of October. Don't interpret. We explain things as they are. That should be the attitude. Why? Why interpretation? By interpretation, there are 664 editions of Bhagavad-gītā. Simply by... One medical man he has interpreted Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa is a physician and Arjuna is a patient. And he has tried to explain through Bhagavad-gītā all anatomic physiology, not this.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- New York, April 9, 1969:

That is the way of understanding paramparā. Although we are not present before Kṛṣṇa, but if the message of Kṛṣṇa is received through the paramparā system as it was understood by Arjuna, then we get directly the message from Kṛṣṇa. This is the system. But if I interpret in my own way, then the paramparā system is broken.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Vrndavana, December 2, 1975:

Everything is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. Unfortunately, we do not take care of it and we make our own interpretation. This rascaldom is going on. And perhaps we are the only society who is proclaiming, "Here is God, Kṛṣṇa. Take it." We are the only society in the whole world. Otherwise they are all misled, all misled. So anyway, others may cooperate or noncooperate, we don't mind. But we cannot change our policy. Our policy is: Kṛṣṇa says, "I am the Supreme;" we must declare throughout the whole world that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme. Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). We shall declare to the whole world that "Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme.

Lecture on SB 7.6.5 -- Vrndavana, December 7, 1975:

Everything is explained. So if you simply try to understand Bhagavad-gītā and don't play rascaldom by interpreting in a different way, then your life is successful. Simply. Kṛṣṇa has left, therefore, before His leaving this world. Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata, tadātmānaṁ sṛjāmi (BG 4.7). He comes when you forget all these things. He comes again. He establishes dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya. What is that dharma? Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja: (BG 18.66) "All this rascaldom, cheating dharma, give up. Simply surrender unto Me."

Lecture on SB 7.7.30-31 -- Mombassa, September 12, 1971:

If I say, suppose somebody is sitting here with his subordinate servant. And if I say, "For me, you are all the same." So the master who is sitting, he will be insulted. Similarly, anyone who thinks that the Supreme Lord and the demigods are on the equal footing, that is offense. Therefore, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu warned that don't hear the interpretation of the Māyāvādīs. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). Anyone who tries to understand Māyāvāda philosophy, misunderstands, not understands, misunderstands, his future is doomed. Doomed means he will never be able to enter into this bīja-nirharaṇam, nirharaṇaṁ yogaḥ. There are different kinds of yoga. This yoga is called bīja-nirharaṇaṁ yogaḥ.

Lecture on SB 7.9.7 -- Mayapur, February 14, 1976:

If you do not get the faith which is required by studying Bhagavad... Bhagavad-gītā is the ABCD reading for understanding God. That is ABC. So if you do not understand even the ABCD, how he'll advance in higher studies? That is not possible. So, even we cannot understand Bhagavad-gītā, the ABCD, Kṛṣṇa says one thing and they make, I mean to say, interpretation in a different way. Kṛṣṇa says aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2), mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate. They do not believe it.

Lecture on SB 7.9.7 -- Mayapur, February 14, 1976:

He may be very big scholar, but because he is avaiṣṇava, not devotee, it has become poison. In our country, we have got so many editions, not only in country, in all, outside the country also. In your country. There are so many hodge-podge interpretation of Bhagavad-gītā, and they are being read and being used for the last two hundred years ago, but there was no effective result. It could not act. But as soon as this Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, we have presented and you are reading, so many thousands of thousands, they are becoming devotee.

Lecture on SB 7.9.8 -- Seattle, October 21, 1968:

Just like here, in this Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, we understand that there is Brahma, or the demigods, and the siddhaḥ. So we have to accept. You cannot understand these things by experimental knowledge. Simply as it is. Therefore I am presenting this Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. Then you understand. That is knowledge, perfect knowledge. Otherwise, if you interpret, if you don't believe, then you don't get. There is no other way. The same example. Just like—I am repeating again—that if you want to know who is your father, the only witness is your mother. Higher evidence is final. If we want to make experiment who is your father, that is not possible. That experimental knowledge is not possible. You have to accept. Similarly, for perfect knowledge of the father or perfect knowledge of the Supreme, you have to accept the version, supreme version of Vedas. Then it is perfect.

Lecture on SB 7.9.42 -- Mayapur, March 22, 1976:

Arjuna also said that, that "I am accepting You, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, because Vyāsadeva has accepted, Asita has accepted, Nārada has accepted." The same thing. We have to understand Kṛṣṇa. We cannot understand directly. Therefore these rascals who are trying to understand Kṛṣṇa directly by interpretation, they are all rascals. They cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. May be very big man, so-called. Nobody is big man. They are also sa vai... No, what is that? No, no. Śva-viḍ-varāhoṣṭra-kharaiḥ saṁstutaḥ puruṣaḥ paśuḥ (SB 2.3.19). Puruṣaḥ paśuḥ. These big, big men who are so much eulogized by some rascals, all these big, big leaders, what they are? Because they are not devotee of Kṛṣṇa, they cannot lead. They simply will mislead. Therefore we take them all rascals. This is the criterion. Take this one criterion.