Vedic knowledge means which is spoken by the Supreme Lord. That is Vedic knowledge. Apauruṣeya. It is not spoken by common man like me. So if we accept Vedic knowledge, if we accept the fact as it is stated by Kṛṣṇa or His representative . . . because His representative will not speak anything which Kṛṣṇa does not speak. Therefore he's representative.
The Kṛṣṇa conscious persons are representative of Kṛṣṇa because a Kṛṣṇa conscious person will not speak anything nonsense, beyond the speaking of Kṛṣṇa. That is the difference. Other nonsense, rascal, they will speak beyond Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65), but the rascal scholar will say: "No, it is not to Kṛṣṇa. It is something else."
Where you get this? Kṛṣṇa directly says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru. So why do you deviate? Why do you say something else: "It is something within Kṛṣṇa"? You'll find . . . I don't wish to name. There are so many rascal scholars, they interpret like that. Therefore in spite of Bhagavad-gītā being a book of knowledge of India, so many people are misguided. Big . . . due to these rascal scholars, so-called scholars. Because they simply misinterpret.