Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Just like this small child, Sarasvati. According to the body, she is acting. She's acting sometimes nonsense, but we take it delight, because she is child. But the same nonsense if I do in another body, grown up body, that will be ridiculous

From Vaniquotes

Expressions researched:
"Just like this small child, Sarasvati. According to the body, she is acting. She's acting sometimes nonsense, but we take it delight, because she is child. But the same nonsense if I do in another body, grown up body, that will be ridiculous"

Lectures

General Lectures

By the destruction of this body, I am not destroyed. I remain, I simply enter another body. I, as spiritual soul, I remain. Just like I'm entering different bodies in this life. I was a child, I enter another body. Just like this small child, Sarasvatī. According to the body, she is acting. She's acting sometimes nonsense, but we take it delight, because she is child. But the same nonsense if I do in another body, grown up body, that will be ridiculous. In this child body, she is naked, but people enjoy it. But when she is grown up and she is lady-like, she is young girl, if she becomes naked, oh that is ridiculous.
Lecture -- Delhi, December 13, 1971:

Dharma, I have explained, occupational duty. So long we have got this material body we have got particular type of occupational duty. We are preaching to the world not any occupational duty but we are preaching eternal duty. This occupational duty is in connection with the body. That is not eternal. Suppose this life I've got a body, human body, or brāhmaṇa birth, or a son in the Rockefeller family, and according to that body, I have got a particular type of duty, standard of living. Deha-yogena dehinām. But as soon as the body's changed, I get another body, the whole duty change. Now I may have a very comfortable body, American body, Rockefeller family body, but next life, according to my karma, we are preparing our next life. Suppose if I get the body of a dog, then my occupational duty will be (indistinct). Because according to the body the duty is changed. So these occupational duties they are not permanent. But I am eternal, na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). By the destruction of this body, I am not destroyed. I remain, I simply enter another body. I, as spiritual soul, I remain. Just like I'm entering different bodies in this life. I was a child, I enter another body. Just like this small child, Sarasvatī. According to the body, she is acting. She's acting sometimes nonsense, but we take it delight, because she is child. But the same nonsense if I do in another body, grown up body, that will be ridiculous. In this child body, she is naked, but people enjoy it. But when she is grown up and she is lady-like, she is young girl, if she becomes naked, oh that is ridiculous. So, here in this life also we see according to the change of the body, the duty is changed. The activities are changing. So, this body is changing, that's a fact. Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ dhīras tatra na muhyati (BG 2.13). Just like in this life we are changing different types of bodies, similarly dehāntara-prāptiḥ, another body. These rascals, they do not understand the simple reasoning. Simple logic they cannot understand, still they argue, "What is the proof there is transmigration of the soul?" Here is the proof. That this child, Sarasvatī, when she is a grown-up lady she'll not act like that. But everyone will accept her, Sarasvatī, the same character (?). Her father, mother, relatives, everything is there, Sarasvatī has got another body. So what is the difficulty to understand this logic? That the soul is immortal and the body is changing. What is the difficulty? Just try to understand, you have to preach immortality of the soul, transmigration of the soul. What is the difficulty? Simple logic. What is the difficulty? Can anyone say? No difficulty? Will you be able to convince others?