Please join, like or share our Vanipedia Facebook Group
Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge

Did Krsna mean that "I leave Bhagavad-gita ambiguous and some learned scholar will come. He will explain"? What is this nonsense? Everything is clear

From Vaniquotes

Expressions researched:
"What is this nonsense? Everything is clear. Bhagavad-gita, in the beginning"

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

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.
Lecture on BG Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972:

If we want to understand the real fact, then we must receive from the paramparā system. Just like we have got our genealogical table. I understand my great-great-grandfather by the paramparā system. Not that I manufacture some name. No. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says that imam, evaṁ paramparā-prāptam (BG 4.2). The Bhagavad-gītā, knowledge must be received by the paramparā system, as it was spoken by Kṛṣṇa and as it has been received by the later ācāryas. Although there are different parties... Just like the Śrī-sampradāya, Brahma-sampradāya, Rudra-sampradāya. They are all in agreement that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All these ācāryas. They'll not say anything that "Because I belong to Brahma-sampradāya, I speak something else." No. We are all in agreement that kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). That is accepted.

So Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna: sa kāleneha yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. "In due..., in course of time, that paramparā system has been lost, or broken. Therefore," Kṛṣṇa said, "I am speaking the old truth unto you so that you begin the paramparā system again." So we have to accept Bhagavad-gītā by the paramparā system. Even the old system is broken, still, it is existing because Kṛṣṇa is speaking to Arjuna, and we have to understand Bhagavad-gītā as Arjuna understood. Then you are in the paramparā. And if you understand Bhagavad-gītā as some so-called scholar understands, then you are not understanding Bhagavad-gītā. You are understanding something nonsense, wasting your time. This is the fact. If you try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as Arjuna understood... 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. Bhagavad-gītā, in the beginning it is said that

dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre
samavetā yuyutsavaḥ
māmakāḥ pāṇḍavāś caiva
kim akurvata sañjaya
(BG 1.1)

Now, why it should be interpreted that "Dharma-kṣetra means this, kuru-kṣetra means this, pāṇḍavāḥ means this"? Why? It is clear. Kurukṣetra still existing. Everyone knows. And that is dharma-kṣetra. Everyone knows. It is not known now. From the Vedic age. Kuru-kṣetre dharmam ācaret. Still people go there for performing ritualistic ceremonies. So Kurukṣetra is still there and it is dharma-kṣetra from time immemorial. Why it should be interpreted that "Kurukṣetra means this, and dharma-kṣetra means this"? Why? Where is the dictionary?

But because one has got some whims, he wants to fulfill his whims on the authority of Bhagavad-gītā, he interprets in a different way. Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is, without nonsensically interpreting. Therefore it is being effective. Before me, many swamis went to the Western countries to preach this Bhagavad-gītā. Not a single person became a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Not a single person. There is not in the history. And now Bhagavad-gītā is being presented as it is, thousands are becoming devotee of Kṛṣṇa. This is the secret. People give me credit that "Swamiji, you have done wonderful. Nobody could do it." I am not a wonderful man. Neither I do know anything magic. I have presented Bhagavad-gītā as it is. That's all. This is the secret. Anyone can do that. You present the thing as it is. Don't adulterate it. Then it will be accepted. Just like paramānna, kṣīra. Kṣīra is very nice food, but if you adulterate it with some grains of sand, it is spoiled. It is spoiled.

So that was being done. Bhagavad-gītā is the science of God, the spiritual science. But it was being adulterated by so many grains of sands. So people could not understand it. We do not present Bhagavad-gītā with some adulteration. Kṛṣṇa says, bhakto 'si priyo 'si arjuna. Kṛṣṇa is instructing Arjuna to begin the paramparā system because the paramparā system was supposed to be broken. People misunderstood. Or some way or other, it was broken. As it is going on now also. So Kṛṣṇa said that "I shall speak to you this same old philosophy of Bhagavad-gītā again." "Why unto me?" Why Kṛṣṇa selected Arjuna? There are many others, learned scholars. Now, Kṛṣṇa says, bhakto 'si priyo 'si. Kṛṣṇa was a military man, er, Arjuna was a military man. He was not a Vedantist. He was a gṛhastha, not even a sannyāsī. Why Kṛṣṇa selected to instruct Arjuna as the disciple of the renovated paramparā system? That is also spoken by Kṛṣṇa: bhakto 'si priyo 'si me (BG 4.3), rahasyam etad uttamam: "Because you are My dear friend, because you are My devotee, you can understand the mysteries of Bhagavad-gītā." Kṛṣṇa did not select a so-called Vedantist to understand Bhagavad-gītā. Because Arjuna was not a Vedantist. He was a military man. He's not supposed to become a great philosopher. He was a gṛhastha. But the real qualification is to become a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Then one can understand what is Bhagavad-gītā. Not by so-called knowledge. No. Knowledge is not perfect unless one understands Kṛṣṇa. That is not knowledge. That is still illusion. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). Māṁ prapadyate: "He surrenders unto Me." Vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ (BG 7.19). When one understands Kṛṣṇa, Vāsudeva, as everything, as the origin of everything, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), then his knowledge is perfect. And so long he's hovering here and there, without any understanding of Kṛṣṇa, his knowledge is not perfect. That perfection of knowledge is attained, as it is described by Kṛṣṇa: bahūnāṁ janmanām ante (BG 7.19).