Hindu scripture

Expressions researched:
"Hindu scripture" |"Hindu scriptures"

SB Canto 3

In the Hindu scriptures, therefore, woman's chastity and devotion to man is greatly emphasized. A woman's attachment to her husband may elevate her to the body of a man in her next life, but a man's attachment to a woman will degrade him, and in his next life he will get the body of a woman.

SB 3.31.41, Purport: From this verse it appears that a woman is also supposed to have been a man in his (her) previous life, and due to his attachment to his wife, he now has the body of a woman. Bhagavad-gītā confirms this; a man gets his next life's birth according to what he thinks of at the time of death. If someone is too attached to his wife, naturally he thinks of his wife at the time of death, and in his next life he takes the body of a woman. Similarly, if a woman thinks of her husband at the time of death, naturally she gets the body of a man in the next life. In the Hindu scriptures, therefore, woman's chastity and devotion to man is greatly emphasized. A woman's attachment to her husband may elevate her to the body of a man in her next life, but a man's attachment to a woman will degrade him, and in his next life he will get the body of a woman. We should always remember, as it is stated in Bhagavad-gītā, that both the gross and subtle material bodies are dresses; they are the shirt and coat of the living entity. To be either a woman or a man only involves one's bodily dress. The soul in nature is actually the marginal energy of the Supreme Lord. Every living entity, being classified as energy, is supposed to be originally a woman, or one who is enjoyed. In the body of a man there is a greater opportunity to get out of the material clutches; there is less opportunity in the body of a woman. In this verse it is indicated that the body of a man should not be misused through forming an attachment to women and thus becoming too entangled in material enjoyment, which will result in getting the body of a woman in the next life. A woman is generally fond of household prosperity, ornaments, furniture and dresses. She is satisfied when the husband supplies all these things sufficiently. The relationship between man and woman is very complicated, but the substance is that one who aspires to ascend to the transcendental stage of spiritual realization should be very careful in accepting the association of a woman. In the stage of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, however, such restriction of association may be slackened because if a man's and woman's attachment is not to each other but to Kṛṣṇa, then both of them are equally eligible to get out of the material entanglement and reach the abode of Kṛṣṇa. As it is confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā, anyone who seriously takes to Kṛṣṇa consciousness—whether in the lowest species of life or a woman or of the less intelligent classes, such as the mercantile or laborer class—will go back home, back to Godhead, and reach the abode of Kṛṣṇa. A man should not be attached to a woman, nor should a woman be attached to a man. Both man and woman should be attached to the service of the Lord. Then there is the possibility of liberation from material entanglement for both of them.

CC Adi-lila

According to Hindu scripture, God’s name is the most powerful hymn.

CC Adi 17.212, Translation: “‘According to Hindu scripture, God’s name is the most powerful hymn. If everyone hears the chanting of the name, the potency of the hymn will be lost.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

There is a ceremony of śrāddha according to Hindu scripture.

Lecture on BG 2.7-11 -- New York, March 2, 1966: So here is a point, that sometimes we may do something which is approved by the general public, but it may not be approved by the supreme authority. Superficially it may appear very appealing to the sentiment of the public, but factually such thing may not be correct, may not be correct. If we accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and "Why He was inducing Arjuna to fight?" It does not mean that He was inducing Arjuna to do something wrong. But from worldly point of view, Arjuna was a very pious man and he was declining to fight, not to kill his kinsmen, not to kill his friends. This... This is a very important point. So he argued, "No, no, if I fight, my people will die, and their wives will become widow, and they will be adulterated, and then, by adulteration, unwanted population will increase, and who will offer śrāddha?" Śrāddha... There is a ceremony of śrāddha according to Hindu scripture. I do not know whether you have in your Christian religion, but according to Hindu, a dead body is offered some respect every year. Just like death anniversary observed, similarly, in the family, the descendants, they offer some foodstuff after some religious ceremony. That is called śrāddha. And it is believed that that offering goes to the dead forefathers. So that is a family religious ceremony. So Arjuna said that "These people will die. Who will offer that ablution to the forefathers?" So from ordinary point of view, from the point of view of a family man, he argued with Kṛṣṇa in so many ways.

It is prescribed in the Hindu scripture that the child, when the father dies, the boy has to perform several ceremonies which is called śrāddha ceremony, so that if the father for his sinful acts is in trouble in his next life, this ceremony will protect him.

Lecture on BG 7.11-16 -- New York, October 7, 1966: For our sinful reaction we have to visit some hell which is known as pun. So it is prescribed in the Hindu scripture that the child, when the father dies, the boy has to perform several ceremonies which is called śrāddha ceremony, so that if the father for his sinful acts is in trouble in his next life, this ceremony will protect him. These are some of the thoughts. And they are true. So putra means pun-nāmno narakād yasmāt trāyate iti putraḥ: "One who delivers the father from the hell which is known as pun, he is called putra."

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

There is no widow marriage according to Hindu scripture.

Lecture on SB 5.5.1-2 -- London (Tittenhurst), September 13, 1969: Just like if one man is satisfied with one woman or one woman is satisfied with one man and live peacefully, that is tapasya. Because natural inclination is that "I want to enjoy that man or that woman." But if you can control, that you be satisfied with woman or with one woman, that is called tapasya. That is austerity. That is, voluntarily, you are restraining himself. Tapasya means voluntary restraint. In India, still, the system is followed in conservative families that a widow cannot marry. There is no widow marriage in India. They, the... Manu-saṁhitā, the law-givers, the saintly persons, Manu-saṁhitā... Why widow marriage is prohibited? The idea is generally, everywhere, in all countries, the female population is greater than the male population. So the idea is that she has become widow. She was once married. Now if again she is married, another virgin girl, she does not get the chance of being married. Therefore there is no widow marriage according to Hindu scripture. And a man is allowed, if he is, I mean to say, able man, he can marry more than one wife. Not that simply marry. To get more than one wife does not mean sense enjoyment. The wife must be maintained very respectfully. She must have good house, good ornaments, good food, good servants, good children. Then one can marry. Not that simply for sense gratification.

In every scripture, there is a process of atonement. In Hindu scripture there are many such injunctions.

Lecture on SB 6.1.7 -- San Francisco, March 1, 1967: In every scripture, there is a process of atonement. Just like in Christian religion, at the time of death, if somebody admits that "I have committed this kind of sin," it is supposed that he is forgiven. Similarly, in Muslim scripture there is also similar injunction, and in Hindu scripture there are many such injunctions. And as far as possible, they are followed by different followers. So the same thing is confirmed here: "My dear King, if somebody does not atone for his sinful activities..." Sinful activities function in three ways. Here it is stated. What is that? Mana-ukta-pāṇibhiḥ. Mana-ukta-pāṇibhiḥ: by mind, by activities of the mind, and by activities of our words, and by activities of our senses. And if I hurt you by harsh word, then that is also a sin.

"Simply by chanting one will become liberated." This is not according to our Hindu scripture.

Lecture on SB 6.2.8 -- Vrndavana, September 11, 1975: So they protested to the magistrate, Muhammadan magistrate, Chand Kazi, that "This Caitanya, the Nimāi Paṇḍit, He has inaugurated one movement that "Simply by chanting one will become liberated." This is not according to our Hindu scripture. So you may be Muhammadan, but you are our ruler. You should give us some protection. Otherwise this Nimāi Paṇḍit will ruin our Hindu religion." This was the complaint. So after all, he is the magistrate. He took some action, and he forbade through the constables that "You cannot chant."

Either you take Hindu scripture or Christian scripture or Muhammadan scripture, in every scripture human form of life is meant for training.

Lecture on SB 7.6.3 -- Montreal, June 16, 1968: Therefore in the human form of life, tapasya. Tapasya means austerity, penance, vows. These are the teachings of all scriptures. Either you take Hindu scripture or Christian scripture or Muhammadan scripture, in every scripture human form of life is meant for training. Tapo divyam [SB 5.5.1]. Lord Ṛṣabha, He instructed His boys. He had one hundred children, boys. So He instructed them, nāyaṁ deho deha-bhājāṁ nṛloke kaṣṭān kāmān arhate viḍ-bhujāṁ ye: [SB 5.5.1] "My dear boys, this form, human form of life, although it is a body, but this body is in human society." Nāyaṁ deho deha-bhājāṁ nṛloke. Nṛloke means Nṛ means man. "So when the body is obtained in the human society, not in the dog society, not in the cat society, that body is not meant for simply working very hard and ultimate sense gratification." That's all.

Festival Lectures

Chand Kazi, was very learned scholar, not only in Muhammadan script, but he was a great scholar Hindu scripture also.

Six Gosvamis Lecture, Sri Sri Sad-govamy-astaka -- Los Angeles, November 18, 1968: They prescribed so many ritualistic performances, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu was saying simply by chanting one can achieve the highest perfection. So they were disturbed, and they lodged complaint to the then magistrate, Kazi. Maulana Chand Kazi, his name was Maulana Chand Kazi. You know, when a Muhammadan is learned and religious he gets the title Maulana. So that magistrate, Chand Kazi, was very learned scholar, not only in Muhammadan scriptures, but he was a great scholar Hindu scripture also. Just like in British period in India, there were many responsible English officers, just like high-court judge, civil service. They were very vastly learned in Sanskrit. One Mr. Woodruff, Justice Woodruff, Englishman in Calcutta high-court, oh, he was a very great scholar, Sanskrit scholar, and he translated all the tantric śāstras. So scholarly people are always there. It doesn't matter. They do not belong to any class of men. Scholars are scholars, saintly persons are saintly persons.

Arrival Addresses and Talks

Do not take Bhagavad-gītā or Kṛṣṇa as something sectarian—"Hindu God," "Hindu scripture." No. It is meant for everyone.

Arrival Address -- New York, April 5, 1973: Bhagavad-gītā is spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead for the benefit of the whole human society. Do not take Bhagavad-gītā or Kṛṣṇa as something sectarian—"Hindu God," "Hindu scripture." No. It is meant for everyone. These names, "Hindu," "Muslim," "Christians," or "Buddhist," these are the designation of the body. Actual religion is different. Actual religion means to understand God and to develop your love for God. That is actual religion. It doesn't matter through which religion you develop your love for God, but the test is, you are first-class religionist if you have developed your dormant love of God. So this movement is meant for awakening the dormant love of God.

General Lectures

Bone, when you touch, according to our Hindu scripture, one has to take bath.

Brandeis University Lecture -- Boston, April 29, 1969: Anyone who is thinking this body, this bundle of skin and bones, is the self... This skin and, I mean to say, blood, and intestines, and stools, and urine—this body means combination of all these nice things, skin, bone... Bone, when you touch, according to our Hindu scripture, one has to take bath. So that bone is within you. Blood is also sometimes accepted as contagious. So this is not the self. Everyone is thinking that "I am this body." This is rubbish thing. So, if you chant this Hare Kṛṣṇa, then you will very easily understand that you are not this body; you are spirit soul,

1971 Conversations and Morning Walks

The modern Hindus, they are not strictly according to the Hindu scripture.

Conversation with Prof. Kotovsky -- June 22, 1971, Moscow:

Prabhupāda: Manu-smṛti. Now they are changing so many. They... Strictly speaking, the modern Hindus, they are not strictly according to the Hindu scripture.

Prof. Kotovsky: Oh, yes.

Prabhupāda: No. They are not... So our point is, we are not going to bring back the old type of Hindu society. It is not that. Our...

Prof. Kotovsky: It is impossible.

Prabhupāda: It is impossible. Our idea is that best ideas from the original idea. Just like in the Bhāgavata there is a description of communistic idea, and it is being described to Mahārāja Yudhisthira. So if there is something good, good experience, why it should not be adopted? That is our point of view. And besides that, in the modern civilization they are missing one point: the aim of human life, scientifically. The aim of human life is self-realization, ātmā-tattvam. It is said, parābhavas tāvad abodha-jātaḥ yāvan na jijñāsa ātmā-tattvam. Unless the human society comes to the point of self-realization, whatever they are doing, they are being defeated, parābhava. I think you know this word, parābhava. Parābhava. Parābhavas tāvad abodha-jātaḥ. So actually it is happening so. The modern society, human society, there is advancement, economic advancement, so many things, advancement. Still, in the matter of keeping peace and tranquility there is fight, individually, socially, politically, nationally. So if we think very cool-headed, then in spite of so much improvement in so many branches of knowledge, we are keeping the same mentality of quarreling. That is also visible in lower animal society. So our conclusion, according to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that this body, human body, it is not meant for working very hard for sense gratification. In the modern civilization the ultimate goal, aim, is sense gratification. That's all. Beyond that, they do not know anything more. They do not know what is next life. There is no department of knowledge or science, scientific department, to study what is there after life, after finishing this body. That is a great, I mean to say, department of knowledge. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said that dehino 'smin yathā dehe [Bg. 2.13]. Dehe. Deha means this body. So there is a dehinaḥ who owns the body, dehi. So dehino 'smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā. The dehi, the owner of the body, is within, and the body's changing from one form to another. The body of a child, baby, a certain type of form, it changes into another type of form when he's child, another type when boy, another type when he's young, another type, he's old. This is going on, but the owner of the body existing. Similarly, when this body will be completely changed, another body he will accept. So people do not understand this. As we are accepting different body even in this present life from babyhood to childhood, from childhood to boyhood, from boyhood to youthhood... That's a fact. Everyone knows it. I was a child, but that childhood body is no more. I have got a different body. Similarly, what is the difficulty to understand: when this body will be no more, I'll have to accept another body? It is great science.

1976 Conversations and Morning Walks

"This is Hindu scripture." What do you mean by Hindu scripture? So they are interpreting in their own way. So Kṛṣṇa is not for the Hindus or the Musselmans or Christians. He is God. He is everyone.

Conversation with News Reporters -- March 25, 1976, Delhi: Prabhupāda: So such fools there are that Bhagavad-gītā is speaking, tathā dehāntara-prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati [Bg. 2.13]—"It is meant for the Hindus." Just see. Such fools there are. And Kṛṣṇa said, annād bhavanti bhūtāni: [Bg. 3.14] "If you have got enough food grains, then all the living entities are satisfied." Is it meant for the Hindus? So this is going on. "This is Hindu scripture." What do you mean by Hindu scripture? So they are interpreting in their own way. So Kṛṣṇa is not for the Hindus or the Musselmans or Christians. He is God. He is everyone. He is for everyone. And it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, sarva-yonīṣu kaunteya mūrtayaḥ sambhavanti yāḥ: [Bg. 14.4] "In all species of life, as many forms of life are there, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ, I am the seed-giving father of all of them." So where is the question of Hindus? This is going on.

We do not belong either to the Hindus or Christian or Jewish. We belong to Kṛṣṇa or God. Kṛṣṇa means God.

Interview with Religious Editor Of the Associated Press -- July 16, 1976, New York:

Prabhupāda: We do not belong either to the Hindus or Christian or Jewish. We belong to Kṛṣṇa or God. Kṛṣṇa means God.

Interviewer: Yeah, but you use the Hindu scriptures.

Prabhupāda: That is another thing. Just like we say the sun, sūrya and you say the sun, the "sun." But the subject matter is the same. You say the sun in the sky as s-u-n, "sun." And we say in India sūrya. S-ū-r-y-a. So the name may be different but the object is the same.

Interviewer: In other words, do you think the India-originated religion is, serves its particular purpose in the Western society? I mean, does, is it of particular value in a rather technological society, the Hindu tradition?

Prabhupāda: Generally speaking, everywhere, everyone everywhere is identifying his body as the self. It does not mean East or West. This is ignorance. Wherever there is ignorance one identifies himself with the body. This is ignorance. It may be in the East or in the West. It doesn't matter.

Of course, the scripture is the Vedic principle, but the word is not Vedic. This word Hindu is not Vedic word.

Interview with Religious Editor Of the Associated Press -- July 16, 1976, New York:

Prabhupāda: That may be Hindu religion. But we do not belong to any religion. That may be true for the Hindu religion what the professor has said, but we do not identify with any religion. We are different from any religious system.

Interviewer: But the scriptures are the same, the Vedic scriptures are Hindu scriptures.

Prabhupāda: No, Hindu religion... Of course, the scripture is the Vedic principle, but the word is not Vedic. This word Hindu is not Vedic word.

Bali-mardana: Hindu is not Sanskrit, it's just a popular, general term.

Prabhupāda: Vedic, Vedas, Vedas, that is real, the word. But they have taken it in a different way. Actually the "Hindu," this name is given by the neighbor Muhammadans. There is a river called Sindhu. That river is still there, it is now in Pakistan. So outside the border of India, the Muhammadans, they used to call the inhabitants of the neighborhood of that river Sindhu, Hindu. Because they pronounce s as h. So this is the origin. So "Hindu" is a title given by the Muhammadan neighbors. It is not found in the Vedic literature.