"The Bhagavad-gītā is also known as the Gītopaniṣad. It is the essence of the Vedic knowledge and one of the most important Upaniṣads in Vedic literature. There are many commentaries on the Bhagavad-gītā, and the necessity for another should be explained in the following basis. An American lady asked me to recommend an English edition of the Bhagavad-gītā which she could read. I was unable to do so in good conscience. Of course there are many translations, but of those I have seen, not only in America but those also in India, none can be said to be authoritative, because in almost every one of them the author has expressed his personal opinion through the commentaries without touching the spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is. The spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā is mentioned in the Gītā itself. It is like this: If we want to take a particular medicine, then we have to follow the directions written on the label of the bottle. We cannot take the medicine according to our own directions or the directions of a friend ot in knowledge of this medicine.
Commentaries (Lectures, BG)
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
Most of you must have read some editions of Bhagavad-gītā. I will give you instances. One of the English translations, commentaries by Dr. Radhakrishnan, in the Ninth Chapter the Lord says,
- man-manā bhava mad-bhakto
- mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru
- mām evaiṣyasi kaunteya
- asaṁśaya...
The Lord says that "You, you just always remain thinking of Me." That means always remain in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Simply this Kṛṣṇa consciousness means some way or other you have to think of Kṛṣṇa always. Some way or other you just engage yourself in some activities so that it can remind you about Kṛṣṇa. That is the process. Therefore those who are elevated devotees, they, in everything, they remember Kṛṣṇa.
"Always think of Me." That is the perfection of life, always thinking of Viṣṇu. But one commentator, very big commentator, he says, "This meditation is not up to Kṛṣṇa." Just see. Kṛṣṇa says "Just meditate upon Me," in the Bhagavad-gītā, and the commentator says, "It is not up to Kṛṣṇa." In this way, in similar way or a different way, every commentary on Bhagavad-gītā so far published I have seen, their business is how to divert one's attention from Kṛṣṇa, although in the Bhagavad-gītā the main factor is Kṛṣṇa. That is mentioned here. What is that? Read on. This Bhagavad-gītā has come. Yes.
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.
The nondevotee's approach to the teachings of the Bhagavad-gītā is something like a bee licking on a bottle of honey. One cannot have a taste of honey unless one can taste within the bottle. Similarly, the mysticism of the Bhagavad-gītā can be understood only by devotees. No one else can taste it, as is stated in the Fourth Chapter of the book. Nor can the Gītā be touched by persons who envy the very existence of the Lord. Therefore the Māyāvādī explanation of the Gītā is a most misleading presentation of the whole truth. Lord Caitanya has forbidden us to read commentaries made by the Māyāvādīs."
Yes. Lord Caitanya has clearly said, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). One meets disaster if he hears a Māyāvādī philosopher to understand Vedic literature. That is His injunction. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Sarva-nāśa means disaster. It is actually disaster. A māyāvādi-bhāṣya, Māyāvādī commentary, they have simply tried, (that) the individual, tiny individual spiritual spark that "You are the Supreme." So he's just (like) Dr. Frog. You see. So puffed up, puffed up, when he... At one time, it will burst. Therefore it is disastrous. It is disastrous. (chuckling) Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. So that's all. Finished? Yes. Oh, not yet?
Devotee: "Therefore the Māyāvādī explanation of the Gītā is a most misleading presentation of the whole truth. Lord Caitanya has forbidden us to read commentaries made by the Māyāvādīs and warns that one who takes to understanding of the Māyāvādī philosophy loses all power to understand the real mystery of the Gītā. If individuality refers to the empirical universe, then there is no need for teachings of the Lord. The plurality of the individual souls and of the Lord is an eternal fact, and it is confirmed by the Vedas as above mentioned."
Prabhupāda: So you read very carefully Bhagavad-gītā. You have to meet so many opposing elements; so you have to argue and convince them. Hm. (saṅkīrtana party enters and offers obeisances) So, what is your report?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Yesterday we sold 125 magazines and collected twenty dollars. Today, so far, Junior Dave(?), he has sold... How many have you sold today?
Junior Dave: Eighty-five.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Eighty-five today so far.
Prabhupāda: And there is night.
Prabhupāda: Hare Kṛṣṇa.
Indian (2): Shri Gandhiji was also great admirer of the Gītā and a great scholar and a great..., made commentary also. But he at the time of the great war asked the great powers to let Hitler come in and not fight him at all. But where have you... He said that Hitler change of heart that would be effective and not that punishment. That means punishment is a fault, and I would like your enlightenment on this paradox.
Prabhupāda: The punishment... Kṛṣṇa does not personally punish. He has got many agents. Just like in the government, the president does not punish directly, but there are many departments. Similarly, parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). His potencies are manyfold. One of the potency is this material nature. It is called māyā. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. Daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā duratyayā (BG 7.14). It is very difficult to surpass the jurisdiction of māyā, duratyayā. But punishment will not be excused.
So these are the statements in the Bhagavad-gītā. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). If we do not accept Bhagavad-gītā in terms of the statements given by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then it is useless. It is simply waste of time. You cannot make any commentary of your poor knowledge. There is nothing very difficult to understand in the Bhagavad-gītā. It is written in very simple Sanskrit word, and things are very clear. As clear as the sunlight. Where is the question of showing the sunlight or the sun-god with your lamp? Suppose now here is sunlight, sufficient light. We can see the sun and everything very clearly. If somebody brings some lamp and says, "Now I shall show you what is sun," it is useless. Bhagavad-gītā is clear itself. Just like the sunlight. It does not require any lamp-bearer to show the Bhagavad-gītā or Kṛṣṇa. It does not require. You try to see Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Then you will be benefited. Otherwise, you'll be misled.
Here it is said, tattva-darśibhiḥ. Tattva-darśibhiḥ means vedānta-vit, one who knows Vedānta. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). One who knows the Absolute Truth, from where everything begins. Janmādy asya yataḥ. That is the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
So the natural commentary of Vedānta-sūtra is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā na, jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā. This is our life. Jīvasya, of every living being. Every living being means especially human beings. Because cats and dogs, they cannot inquire about Brahman, or the Absolute Truth. Therefore the conclusion is that the human form of life, one should not be engaged simply in the animal propensities of life. That is simply waste of time. He must inquire of the Absolute Truth. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. And he must try to understand. Tad viddhi, tattva-darśibhiḥ. From the tattva-darśī. Jñāninaḥ, tattva-darśinaḥ, these are the words.
"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.
He started the nonviolence movement, and he wanted to support... Everyone takes advantage of Bhagavad-gītā and tries to support his view on the strength of Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore you will find so many interpretations. Everyone wants to utilize. There are more than six hundred publication, commentaries, on Bhagavad-gītā. One Dr. Rele in Bombay, he has interpreted Bhagavad-gītā as talks between a physician and a patient.
So these things are going on, but that is not Bhagavad-gītā. That is nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhiḥ. Nāma-aparādha, ten kinds of offenses... This is offense. Just like nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhiḥ. We say, the śāstra says, that by chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, you become cleansed of your sinful activities. That's a fact. But if somebody thinks that "I shall go on committing sinful activity and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra so it will be adjusted, neutralized, this is the most sinful activity, nāmno balāt, by the strength of chanting, committing sin. So similarly on the strength of Bhagavad-gītā, if one wants to prove his foolish philosophy, that is a great offense.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Mr. Goldsmith: Do you want to make it now? Uh. (break)
Student: ...big scholars would, would write a commentary on the Gītā if he, if it says in the Gītā that you must belong to the disciplic succession in order to be able to understand it.
Prabhupāda: Yes. The trick is that because Gītā is a very reputed literature and Dr. Radhakrishnan, he's also a reputed scholar, so he thought that "I can..." Now, at the present moment, the things are going that everyone can give his own interpretation. That is the modern tendency, that everyone can give his own interpretation in any literature. So that, I mean to say, propensity, is also in Dr. Radhakrishnan, in Gandhi, and many other persons also. They are renowned persons of the world. So they have translated, and they have given their own opinion. But actually, so far Bhagavad-gītā is concerned, it is to be understood in the process as recommended by Kṛṣṇa. That is clear here.
This disciplic succession devotee. Otherwise there is no possibility. If that disciplic succession is something else than devotional service, then he cannot understand Bhagavad-gītā. There are many practical experiences, and so many scholars, books we have studied, and their commentary is all nonsense because they are not bhakta. They try to understand Bhagavad-gītā simply by their academic qualification. That is not possible. That is not possible. If somebody is trying to Bhagavad-gītā by his academic qualification... What is the value of this academic qualification? It has no value in the presence of spiritual science. It is a different thing. It is to be understood in a different process.
The Blessed Lord. He is Lord. He can say. The Lord is not like ordinary man. That "Because we cannot say to the sun-god, therefore Kṛṣṇa cannot say," that is our foolishness. Why should we calculate Kṛṣṇa's activity with my activities? Therefore all the commentaries who think Kṛṣṇa as ordinary man, they are null and void. Such commentaries should not be accepted.
We have explained in our introduction that all the commentaries in the market, they are simply presentation of the particular commentator's personal view. That is not Bhagavad-gītā. If you want to understand Bhagavad-gītā, then you should understand as they are said. You don't interpret in your own way.
Now, because there should be some doubt of the ordinary man, that "How Kṛṣṇa could say to the sun-god?" that is explained in the next verse. Because Arjuna was taking instruction from Kṛṣṇa, he knew Kṛṣṇa, what He is.
Madhudviṣa: "Arjuna is recognized by the Lord as a devotee. Therefore one who follows the line of Arjuna in understanding the Gītā will derive benefit from it. Otherwise one will simply waste his valuable time in reading commentaries. Arjuna accepts Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and any commentary of the Gītā following in the footsteps of Arjuna is real devotional service to the cause of this great science. But the demons do not accept Lord Kṛṣṇa as He is. The demons concoct something out of their imagination about Kṛṣṇa's instructions. Here is a warning regarding such misleading paths. One should try to follow the disciplic succession from Arjuna and thus be benefited by this great science of the Śrīmad-Bhagavad-gītā."
Prabhupāda: Yes. If we want to study Bhagavad-gītā, then we follow the principles. Just like we have explained this in the introduction, that when you take a bottle of medicine, there is some direction that "Two tablets, twice in a day after meals." So you have to follow the instruction. Then you get benefit. You cannot take any instruction about taking that medicine from a friend or from an expert educationist. No. You have to take direction only from the physician. He is the expert in that line.
We are not destroyed simply by destruction of this body. We remain. We accept another body. Tathā dehāntara-prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati (BG 2.13).
This is Bhagavad-gītā. Nobody wants to know this. They manufacture their own commentaries. In that way you'll never understand. You'll understand as Kṛṣṇa says, sa eva ayaṁ purātanaḥ. The same thing. What is that same thing? That "I am God. I am Kṛṣṇa. You are My part and parcel." This is an eternal relationship. It cannot be broken, but you have forgotten. You have forgotten your relationship with Kṛṣṇa. You have made your relationship with your family, so-called family, so-called country, so-called society, and so on, so on, so on, so on. This is all temporary. Suppose I am Indian today. You are American tomo..., today. But is there guarantee after your death you'll become American or I'll become Indian? Or I'll take my birth in the same family? No. According to my karma, I may become cats and dogs.
That is rascaldom. That is not understanding of Bhagavad-gītā. Bhagavad-gītā means you must understand what Kṛṣṇa says. That is understanding. But generally, it is done, "Kill Kṛṣṇa. There was no Kṛṣṇa. There was no battlefield. There was no Mahābhārata. I have my concoction about Kṛṣṇa." This kind of commentary and understanding of Bhagavad-gītā has spoiled the whole world.
Therefore in the Western countries so many swamis and yogis went there and they misrepresented Bhagavad-gītā. Of course, everyone knows in Eastern country Bhagavad-gītā. Every institution, every gentleman, learned man, knows that there is a nice book, Bhagavad-gītā, but they read these faulty commentaries. They cannot understand. Now we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is, and they are now understanding what is real Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore they are now devotees.
So how did he understood? How he did understand Kṛṣṇa? He understood Kṛṣṇa: paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān (BG 10.12). So you understand like that.
Why do you misinterpret, "Oh there is no Kṛṣṇa, there is no battlefield, it is all fictitious, I can make my own commentary, you can make your own..."? Why all this nonsense? Pūrvataraiḥ. Just Arjuna did, Arjuna accepted, accept like that. Then your Bhagavad-gītā reading is perfect. Otherwise simply wasting your time and misleading others. "This meaning is, this meaning is, that meaning is that." Why meaning is that? What right you have got to say like that? But these rascals are doing and spoiling the whole country. You see? Misinterpreting. There is no misinterpretation. Try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Your life will be successful. So try to follow Arjuna. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). Dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. (aside:) Take this.
Devotee: "Only the fools and rascals deride the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Kṛṣṇa. Such fools take it upon themselves to write commentaries on the Bhagavad-gītā without any attitude of service to the Lord. Consequently they cannot properly distinguish between the word bhajanti and the word worship. So the culmination of all kinds of yoga practice lies in bhakti-yoga. All other yogas are but means to come to the point of bhakti-yoga. Yoga actually means bhakti-yoga. All other yogas are progressions toward this destination. From the beginning of karma-yoga to the end of bhakti-yoga is a long way to self-realization. Karma-yoga without fruitive results is the beginning of this path. When karma-yoga increases in knowledge and renunciation the stage is called jñāna-yoga. When jñāna-yoga increases in meditation on the Supersoul by different physical processes and the mind is on Him it is called aṣṭāṅga-yoga. And when one surpasses the aṣṭāṅga-yoga and comes to the point of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, it is called bhakti-yoga."
Prabhupāda:Yes, the gradual progress of yoga system. Karma-yoga to jñāna-yoga. Karma-yoga means ordinary activities, fruitive activities. Ordinary activities means sinful activities also, but karma-yoga does not mean sinful activities. Only good, pious activities or prescribed activities. That is called karma-yoga. Then, by performing karma-yoga one comes to the platform of jñāna-yoga, knowledge. And from knowledge to this aṣṭāṅga-yoga, eightfold yoga system—dhyāna, dhāraṇā, prāṇāyāma, āsana—like that, those who are practicing the aṣṭāṅga-yoga. Then from aṣṭāṅga-yoga concentrating the mind on Viṣṇu come to the point of bhakti-yoga. And when one comes to the bhakti-yoga platform, that is the perfectional stage of yoga. And this Kṛṣṇa consciousness means from the very beginning, directly, that bhakti-yoga. Go on.
So the object of yoga, ultimate goal of yoga, is to understand Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa consciousness means to practice the topmost type of yoga system. So this yoga system is being described by Kṛṣṇa Himself. Why? Because He was teaching His most intimate friend, Arjuna. (Sanskrit commentary) Vyākhyāta-lakṣaṇe svopasye mayy āsakta-mati-mātra nitaraṁ mano yasya saḥ. Now in the beginning, the Lord says that "This system of yoga can be practiced by persons who have developed attachment for Me." This attachment I have described for the last three, four days, in a different way. So this yoga system cannot be practiced by an ordinary man who has no attachment for Kṛṣṇa. This is a different system. And the topmost. (Sanskrit commentary) Tvam anyo vā tadṛṣo mad-āśrayo mad-dāsya-sakhyādy-ekatamena bhāvena.
So if we have faith, if we believe theoretically and practically Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then by the speeches which is being delivered by Kṛṣṇa in this chapter, you can understand God. There is no difficulty.
(Sanskrit commentary) Mat-parataṁ yanis cayāvanityārthaḥ, samagraṁ sādhiṣṭhānaṁ sāvibhūtiṁ sāparikaram. And if you believe Kṛṣṇa, then the result will be that you can understand God, how He is working, how His energies are acting, how He is manifested, what is this material world, what is the spiritual world, what are these living creatures, what is their relationship. So many things in God's creation. The whole Vedic literature are dealing in three things. First thing is that what is your relationship with God. Then the next step is that as soon as we understand our relationship with God, then we can act in that way.
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.
"At that time I appear." Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, janma karma me divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ (BG 4.9). We have to understand Him in truth, not by imagination, not by malinterpretation, but by fact. The fact is being explained by Kṛṣṇa Himself. Why we should go to understand Kṛṣṇa by the commentary of some less intelligent, some poor fund of knowledge? Why we should go?
So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means we are presenting the Bhagavad-gītā as it is. That's all. We have no difficulty. We have no difficulty because Kṛṣṇa is accepted as authority, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, by all the ācāryas, not only formerly, like Vyāsadeva, Nārada, Asita, Devala, many, many big, big stalwart... Vyāsadeva everyone knows. Vyāsadeva is the original writer of Vedic knowledge, Vedavyāsa. He accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. His disciple Nārada accepts, the Supreme Personality of..., Vyāsadeva's guru, Nārada.
Don't read Bhagavad-gītā where the attempt is to kill Kṛṣṇa. Don't read. Then it will be spoiled. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said: māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). Sarva-nāśa. If you hear the rascal commentary that "Kṛṣṇa means this, Kurukṣetra means this, body means, Pāṇḍava means this," in this way, if you drag some concocted meaning, then you'll never understand what is Bhagavad-gītā. You'll simply spoil your time. Śrama eva hi kevalam (SB 1.2.8). That is simply wasting time. Read Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. Kṛṣṇa says, "I am the Supreme."
You give your own thesis in a different way. But these people, they take advantage of the popularity of Bhagavad-gītā and interpret in a different way according to their own whims. Therefore people do not understand what is Kṛṣṇa. That is the difficulty. And the purpose of Bhagavad-gītā is to understand Kṛṣṇa. And all the so-called scholars' and politicians' commentary is to banish Kṛṣṇa or to kill Kṛṣṇa—the Kaṁsa's policy. The Kaṁsa was always thinking of Kṛṣṇa, how to kill Him. This is called demonic endeavor. So that will not help you.
Therefore Kṛṣṇa says you have to develop your love and attraction for Kṛṣṇa. That is wanted. Mayy āsakta-manāḥ pārtha yogaṁ yuñjan mad-āśrayaḥ. "This yoga practice can be performed," mad-āśrayaḥ, "under My protection or My devotee's protection." You cannot take protection of another rascal who interprets Bhagavad-gītā in a different way. You have to take shelter directly.
Sarpocchiṣṭa... Just like milk, everyone knows, a very nice food, most nutritious food, but if it is touched by the life of a serpent, immediately spoiled. Immediately. Another place, Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). If we hear Māyāvādi-bhāṣya, commentaries by the Māyāvādīs, those who do not accept the Personality of Godhead... They called, they are called Māyāvādīs. Māyāvādī means they see everything māyā. Even Kṛṣṇa is māyā. That is called Māyāvādī. The Māyāvādī philosophy is that "When Kṛṣṇa comes, He comes with a material body." That is called Māyāvādī. "God is impersonal. When He comes, He takes a form, He takes the form of this matter." This is Māyāvādī. There are so many faulty statements of the Māyāvādīs. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, māyāvādī haya kṛṣṇe aparādhī. They're offenders, offenders. Therefore, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. One becomes doomed by hearing the Māyāvādī commentary.
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. But the thing is that they dare to write commentary on Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore here it is said that manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu kaścid yatati siddhaye, yatatām api siddhānām (BG 7.3). First of all, one must be perfect. And amongst the perfect, then Kṛṣṇa is known very rarely. Amongst the perfect.
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.
The same thing, tattvataḥ, we have to understand. In the Fourth Chapter it is said that janma karma me divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ (BG 4.9). That tattvataḥ, you can understand Kṛṣṇa tattvataḥ. Then another place Kṛṣṇa says, bhaktyā mām abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ. So our aim should be to understand Kṛṣṇa tattvataḥ in truth, not superficially, not by foolish commentary. If we simply try to follow what Kṛṣṇa has said, what is the difficulty? There is no difficulty, but foolishly we interpret in a different way, and māyā takes away our knowledge, māyayāpahṛta-jñānā. He is thinking that he is very learned scholar, but he is fool number..., rascal number one. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says māyayāpahṛta-jñānā. Na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ. Kṛṣṇa is speaking so many ways about Himself. Without understanding Kṛṣṇa in His own way, we are trying to understand Kṛṣṇa in different way. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says māyayāpahṛta-jñānā, āsuri bhāvam. The atheistic class of men, they interpret in a different way, because theirknowledge has been taken by māyā.
Indian man (2): Śrīla Prabhupāda, in Back to Godhead, on page five, it is said that Śrī Vallabhācāryajī, a devotee to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, wrote commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavata, and Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu rejected his commentary, and then He said that He is not prepared to listen to his commentary, and he gives certain other comments.
Prabhupāda: Not certain other comment. The Vallabhācārya, he brought his Subodhinī-ṭīkā, and he was great admirer of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and he said that "I have written one commentary which is far better than the comments given by Śrīdhara Svāmī." So that was disapproved by Caitanya Mahāprabhu. If you disapprove previous ācārya or if you become more intelligent than previous ācārya, then you are not ācārya. This is... This was Caitanya Mahāprabhu's... He disapproved. Our process is evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2). We cannot disregard. Śrīdhara is the original commentator of Bhāgavata. If you say that "I am better than Śrīdhara Svāmī," then you immediately become rejected. If I say... Just like there are some people, they create some avatāra, and they say, "This avatāra is better than Kṛṣṇa"—immediately rejected. Immediately. He must know his value.
In the Bhagavad-gītā also, we find: ācāryopāsanam. We have to follow the footprints, footsteps, of the ācāryas, because they can give us right direction. And one who does not follow the ācāryas and creates and manufactures his mental concoction, his version will not be accepted. There are many different commentaries on the Bhagavad-gītā, but not all of them are according to the direction of the ācāryas. You have to accept Bhagavad-gītā as it is under the direction of the ācāryas. They do not make any change. They explain how Kṛṣṇa is the greatest. Not that comment in a different way and deviate you that Kṛṣṇa is ordinary man.
Arjuna was taught Bhagavad-gītā, how much time? At most, within half an hour. Because he was very intelligent. This Bhagavad-gītā, the people of the world are reading. Very, very learned scholar, wise men, they are reading. They are trying to understand, giving different interpretation. And there are thousands of edition, commentaries. But Arjuna was intelligent; he understood it within half an hour.
So it requires relative intelligence. Everything... This world is relative. Law of relativity. That is scientific. Professor Einstein's theory? Law of relativity? So it is relatively. One can become immediately Kṛṣṇa conscious within a second, and one cannot become Kṛṣṇa conscious after many, many births. So it is relative. If you have got sufficient intelligence, you can accept it immediately. If there is less intelligence, then it will take time. You cannot say that "It will be possible after so many years." That cannot be said. It is relative. Everything is relative.
Those who are accepted as the religious heads of Indian culture, all of them accepted this Bhagavad-gītā as principle of religion and Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So there is no doubt about it. And so far outsiders, they also take it, this book, as book of authority, book of knowledge, and they have studied very serious study of this book. They write commentaries, great scholars, great philosophers. So it is also a dharma. But, but there are persons, in spite of its acceptance by the ācāryas and scholars, they have no faith. They do not think that it is a book of authority or book of knowledge. Aśraddadhānāḥ. They have no faith. They think that it is simply aggravating or exaggeration or a person who is known as Kṛṣṇa and His principle. So therefore they have no faith. Dhīra vrsatvena tam bhinna mataḥ śruti-mātra eva. Śruti-mātra means it is simply praising some principle. That's all. In this way it is not accepted by everyone.
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 unless we become ācāryavān... That is the Vedic instruction.
Now, this śloka is very important for the devotees. There was a great devotee. His name was Ānandācārya. So when he was writing commentaries on this particular śloka, verse, he saw that teṣāṁ nityābhiyuktānāṁ yoga-kṣemaṁ vahāmy aham (BG 9.22), the Lord says that "I myself take the burden and take the load on my head, and I deliver them to my devotees, what they require, what they require. He doesn't require to go outside. I myself go and deliver the goods, whatever he requires." This is written here. Teṣāṁ nityābhiyuktānām. Those who are cent percent engaged in the loving service of the Lord, teṣāṁ nityābhiyuktānāṁ yoga-kṣemaṁ vahāmy aham (BG 9.22). Yoga means what is required by him, and kṣemam means what he has got, he requires to be protected. So these two things the Lord takes charge, that "I personally do it." For whom? Ananyāś cintayanto mām. Those who have no other thought than Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa conscious. Ananyāś cintayanto mām. Ye janāḥ paryupāsate, and engaged in that way always. He has no other business, simply Kṛṣṇa. For him these things the Lord does. It is specifically mentioned here.
Now this Arjunācārya...that's a very nice story. When he was writing commentaries, oh, he thought, "How is that Lord will come Himself and deliver the goods? Oh, it is not possible. He might be sending through some agents." So he wanted to cut vahāmy aham, "I bear the burden and deliver." He wrote in a way that "I send some agent who delivers." So that Arjunācārya went to take bath, and in the meantime two boys, very beautiful boys, they brought some very nice foodstuff in large quantity. And in India there is a process to taking two sides burden on the bamboo. Just like a scale it is balanced. So these two boys brought some very highly valuable foodstuff and grains and ghee, and his wife was there. And the boys said, "My dear mother, Arjunācārya has sent these goods to you. Please take delivery." "Oh, you are so nice boy, you are so beautiful boys, and he has given. And Ācārya is not so cruel. How is that? He has given so much burden to you, and he is not kind...?"
He has written Bhagavad-gītā..." But we do not know actually what Kṛṣṇa is. And this society especially meant to broadcast the knowledge about Kṛṣṇa. Therefore we have named particularly this society the Society for Krishna Consciousness. There is the... People do not know it. They are writing commentaries on Kṛṣṇa's book, but they are speaking nonsense because they do not know Kṛṣṇa. Tattvenātaś cyavanti te: "They fall down from the truth."
This is... So therefore we should try to know Kṛṣṇa by paramparā system. Kṛṣṇa is delivering His instruction to Arjuna, and if we understand as Arjuna understood... That is mentioned in the Tenth Chapter of Bhagavad-gītā. Then we can understand Kṛṣṇa to some extent. We cannot understand Kṛṣṇa in full. That is not possible because He's unlimited, and we are limited. So our power will fail to understand Kṛṣṇa fully. But if we understand something, something about Him...
Bhakto 'si priyo 'si me rahasyam etad uttamam (BG 4.3). The Lord said that "The mystery of Bhagavad-gītā is very confidential. So, without becoming a pure and unalloyed devotee of Mine, it is very difficult to understand." Actually it is so.
In, in the market you'll have so many commentaries of the Bhagavad-gītā. In India we have counted, there are about six hundred and forty-five different commentaries of Bhagavad-gītā. One Dr. Rele(?) of Bombay, he has interpreted Bhagavad-gītā as the talks between the patient and the medical practitioner. Yes. He has imposed on Kṛṣṇa as the physician and Arjuna as the patient. And in his commentary he has tried to, I mean to say, interpose all the meanings of anatomy, physiology, everything in his own imagination.
Similarly, at the present moment, there are so many commentaries and people have taken that anybody can interpret in his own way. This is the modern view.
Therefore Kṛṣṇa suggests, brahma-sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumadbhir viniścitaṁ.
Try to understand Brahma-sūtra, Vedānta philosophy. Vedānta philosophy is explained—Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. That is the real commentary of Vedānta-sūtra. You cannot understand Vedānta-sūtra as it is because it is mentioned in codes. Just like we have got business, Bentley's code. One small word but they take It has got a big sentence. Just like in business they write, Bentley's, CIF. So CIF means it is the... Just like we say, ISKCON. ISKCON means... "I" means international, S means society, and K means Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and so..., Kṛṣṇa, and CON means consciousness. As we have simplified, similarly there are many things, codes. So in the Vedānta-sūtra means they are codes, but in each code there is ample meaning. So that is commentary.
Kṛṣṇa gives a special reference to the Brahma-sūtra, Vedānta-sūtra. Jñāna-vairāgya-yuktayā (SB 1.2.12) means one has to learn very nicely Vedānta-sūtra. And the explanation of Vedānta-sūtra, natural comment on Vedānta-sūtra, is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Bhāṣyāyāṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary.
Because the author, Vyāsadeva, after compiling Vedānta-sūtra under the instruction of Nārada Muni, his guru—Vyāsadeva's guru is Nārada Muni—he was not satisfied even after compiling Vedānta-sūtra. He was not very happy. So Nārada Muni advised him that "You should directly describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Then you'll be happy. It is indirect. All the Vedic literatures, they are indirect. You directly..." Therefore Vyāsadeva took Vedānta-sūtra and from the very beginning of Vedānta-sūtra, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), he commented on the Vedānta-sutra. Janmādy asya yataḥ anvayad itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ svarāṭ/ tene brahma hṛdā ya ādi-kavaye muhyanti yatra sūrayaḥ. In this way. Here Kṛṣṇa personally gives the Brahma-sūtra. So Brahma-sūtra's commentary is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
Prabhupāda:
- mahā-bhūtāny ahaṅkāro
- buddhir avyaktam eva ca
- indriyāṇi daśaikaṁ ca
- pañca cendriya-gocarāḥ
- icchā dveṣaḥ sukhaṁ duḥkhaṁ
- saṅghātaś cetanā dhṛtiḥ
- etat kṣetraṁ samāsena
- sa-vikāram udāhṛtam
This is more or less sāṅkhya philosophy, analysis of material elements. We are embodied in material elements. Kṛṣṇa is questioned by Arjuna, "What is this body and who is the owner of this body, and what is knowledge?" Kṛṣṇa has answered that "The soul is the owner of this body, and I also, I am also the owner of this body." The owner of this body, one individual soul and the Supersoul. Just like owner of this storefront. The tenant is in one sense an owner; at the same time the landlord is also owner. These points we have discussed. Now, Kṛṣṇa has also discussed that the knowledge by which we can understand the soul, the Supersoul, and the material embodiment, that is real knowledge.
So we belong to the Madhvācārya Sampradāya. Fortunately, all these ācāryas, even Śaṅkarācārya, they appeared from South India. This sampradāya, ācārya-sampradāya, is going on all over India. So every sampradāya has got his commentary on the Brahma-sūtra. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says here, brahma sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumadbhir viniścitaiḥ (BG 13.5). Unless a sampradāya, the four sampradāyas, they do not comment on the Brahma-sūtra, he'll not..., that sampradāya is not accepted. And if you do not accept the sampradāya..., sampradāya-vihīnā ye mantrās te niṣphalā matāḥ.
If you do not take your initiation mantra from the sampradāya, then it is useless. Now, there are so many apasampradāya. They do not come in disciplic succession, but becomes guru, teacher. Therefore everything is topsy-turvied. Nobody has got fixed idea what is God. Everyone has created his own philosophy. The whole thing is now confused.
Therefore Kṛṣṇa specifically mentions, Brahma-sūtra. Brahma-sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumadbhir viniścitaiḥ (BG 13.5). The sampradāya must have understanding of the Brahma-sūtra, Vedānta-sūtra. So all the sampradāyas, they have got their commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra and... Even Śaṅkarācārya. But his commentary is not accepted by the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas because he has tried to derive some meaning, interpretation. But there is no question of interpretation. When the things are clear, in the Brahma-sūtra, all the sūtras are very clear. So you don't require any interpretation. You can expand, explain very elaborately. That is another thing. But you cannot go beyond the sutra.
Māyāvādī bhāṣya means Śaṅkara, Śārīraka-bhāṣya of the Brahma-sūtra. If you hear the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, then you'll be doomed, you will be Godless. Therefore it has been forbidden by Caitanya Mahāprabhu. All the Vaiṣṇava sampradāyas, Rāmanujya Sampradāya, Madhvācārya Sampradāya, they all, I mean to say, disagree with the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, Brahma-sūtra.
So far we are concerned, Madhva-Gauḍīya Sampradāya, our ācāryas, they took it, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, as the right commentary on Brahma-sūtra. Bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrānāṁ vedārtha-paribṛṁhitam **. This Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real bhāṣya of Brahma-sūtra. So the Gauḍīya Sampradāya did not make any commentary on the Brahma-sūtra because they took it, Caitanya Mahāprabhu took it as, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, as a natural commentary, because Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is also made by Vyāsadeva and Vyāsadeva is the original author of Brahma-sūtra. So author made his own commentary; so there was no need of another commentary. This is the Gauḍīya-siddhānta, Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava-siddhānta.
"The Gauḍīya Sampradāya has no commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra." So at that time Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura was requested... Because he was grand scholar, grand old man scholar, at that time living in Vṛndāvana... So he was very old at that time; so he authorized Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana, that "You do it." There was no need, but people are demanding, "Where is your commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra?" So Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana, with the order of Govindaji at Jaipur, he wrote the commentary on Brahma-sūtra. That name is Govinda-bhāṣya. So the Gauḍīya-Brahmā Sampradāya, they have got also commentary on Brahma-sūtra. That is required.
So Kṛṣṇa has explicitly explained that brahma-sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumadbhir. Hetumadbhir viniścitaṁ. The Brahma-sūtra is called therefore nyāya-prasthāna, with logic and reason, hetumadbhir, cause and effect, Everything. Because people like to understand on the basis of philosophy and reasoning everything. Yes, that is required.
Span of life is very short. And manda, all bad, not good men. Manda. And even there are so-called good men, they have their own process of knowledge, speculative process, godless. The main basic principle of speculative process is to avoid Kṛṣṇa, to avoid God. There are so many commentaries on Bhagavad-gītā to make Kṛṣṇa nil. That is mental speculation. Somebody is saying that in the there is karma only recommended. Somebody says jñāna. Somebody says yoga. Somebody says bhakti.
But actually Bhagavad-gītā is meant for bhaktas. Bhakto 'si sakhā ceti. Bhagavad-gītā was instructed to Arjuna for his only qualification, that he was a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Bhakto 'si me sakhā ceti. So the whole Bhagavad-gītā is the essence of Vedic knowledge, and the Vedic knowledge means to understand Kṛṣṇa. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15). Vedeṣu durlabham adurlabham ātma-bhaktau (Bs. 5.33).
We are giving God: "Here is God. Here is His name. Here is His address. Here is occupation. Here is His father's name, His mother's name." Everything here is. This is not bogus, bogus (indistinct). Kṛṣṇa is accepted God. How is He accepted? Vedic literature, the Brahma-sūtra, says. The Brahma-sūtra commentary, explanation, is the Bhāgavatam. Bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrānām **. Brahma-sūtrānām, commentary... (break) ...and according to your consciousness, in this way they have become entangled, entrapped in this material (indistinct). That is not the life of human being. The life of human being is to become Kṛṣṇa conscious, and you will be peaceful as soon as you understand Kṛṣṇa. What is that Kṛṣṇa?
That is not difficult. Arjuna's understanding is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. So if you follow the footprints of Arjuna, then you are rightly understanding Bhagavad-gītā. But if you are following the footprints of some rascal, then you are not understanding Bhagavad-gītā. You are understanding something else. This is the secret. Here we have got so many commentaries on Bhagavad-gītā, as one thinks. As if Kṛṣṇa left Bhagavad-gītā to be commented by some rascals to understand! Why? He said Bhagavad-gītā clearly. Why it is to be interpreted by some rascals? Did Kṛṣṇa mean that "I leave Bhagavad-gītā ambiguous and some learned scholar will come. He will explain"? What is this nonsense? Everything is clear.
So our proposition is "Follow Kṛṣṇa." Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). The original person. Ādi-puruṣam. Govindam ādi-puruṣam. Śaṅkarācārya is, say, one thousand five hundred years, but Kṛṣṇa, He's the original puruṣa, before the creation. The creation was made... Śaṅkarācārya also admits in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā: nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. And he accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead: sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. So you cannot supersede Kṛṣṇa by accepting Śaṅkarācārya. Śaṅkarācārya admits, sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. So Śaṅkarācārya admits Kṛṣṇa is the authority, but Kṛṣṇa says that this material body is prakṛti. How you can say it is puruṣa? Kṛṣṇa says that bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ, bhinnā me prakṛtir aṣṭadhā: (BG 7.4) "These eight kinds of prakṛti, they are My separated energy." How you can say it is puruṣa?
| Page Title: | Commentaries (Lectures, BG) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, RupaManjari |
| Created: | 06 of Nov, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=50, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 50 |