Impersonal (Lectures, BG)

Expressions researched:
"imperson" |"impersonal" |"impersonally"

Notes from the compiler: VedaBase query:imperson or impersonal or impersonally not "Impersonal Brahman" not "impersonal feature*"

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 :

Devotee: "There are three kinds of transcendentalists: the yogi, the impersonalist and the bhakta, or devotee. Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna, 'I am making you the first man of disciplic succession. The old succession is broken. I wish to reestablish the line of teaching which was passed down from the sun-god. So you become the authority of the Bhagavad-gītā.' The Bhagavad-gītā is directed to the devotee of the Lord who is directly in touch with the Lord as a friend. To learn the Bhagavad-gītā one should be like Arjuna, a devotee having a direct relationship with the Lord. This is more helpful than yoga or impersonal philosophical speculation. A devotee can be in relationship with the Lord in five different ways. He may have passive..., have a passive relationship..."

Prabhupāda: Now here is explained who is a devotee. That is explained.

Lecture on BG 1.15 -- London, July 15, 1973:

Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān. The same object. So the Brahman realization is impersonal realization. Just like the sun, the sun globe, and the sunshine. They are one, but the sunshine, realization of the sunshine, is not realization of the sun globe. Or realization of the sun globe is not realization of the sun god who is within the sun globe. Vivasvān. His name is Vivasvān. The present predominating Deity in the sun planet, his name is Vivasvān. And his son Manu is called Vaivasvata Manu. This is the age of Vaivasvata Manu. So at the... This is very nice example, that the sunshine, the sun globe and the sun god. They are all one, but still, the sun globe is not the person, sun god; neither the sunshine is not the person sun, although they are one. This is called acintya-bhedābheda-tattva, inconceivably one and different simultaneously.

Lecture on BG 1.26-27 -- London, July 21, 1973:

One can understand. Why I take so much responsibility of family? I was alone. Why I get married? Why I beget children? Why I make friends? Because I want to enjoy. So Kṛṣṇa is also a person. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). He has produced so many children, these living entities. Why? To enjoy along with them. Just try to understand the psychology. Yato vā imāni bhūtāni jayante, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Where this idea came from, that "I shall be happy within society, friendship and love, children?" Wherefrom this idea came? Where is the origin? The origin is there in Kṛṣṇa. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Janmādy asya yataḥ. The origin of love. Just like Kṛṣṇa is loving Rādhārāṇī. So the loving idea came from Kṛṣṇa. Anything that is within our experience, that is in Kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa cannot be impersonal. That is nonsense. Kṛṣṇa is exactly a person like me, you. But the difference is that He's very, very, unlimitedly powerful. I am limited. This is the difference. So Kṛṣṇa also wants that to live with His family. Our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is just to train ourselves again to enter into the family of Kṛṣṇa. This is our movement. With these families, the so-called families, we are suffering. We are suffering. But this family idea is there this. That is perfect in Kṛṣṇa, with Kṛṣṇa. The family idea, wherefrom family idea comes without it is being situated in Kṛṣṇa? Because nothing can be visible without being in Kṛṣṇa. He is the origin. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: (BG 10.8) "I am the origin of everything."

Lecture on BG 1.30 -- London, July 23, 1973:

So the Māyāvādī impersonalists, they cannot understand that serving Kṛṣṇa is simply pleasure and blissful. They cannot understand. Therefore they become impersonalists: "No. The Absolute Truth cannot be person." That is another side of the Buddha philosophy. Impersonal means zero. That is also zero. So Buddhist philosophy, they also make the ultimate goal zero, and these Māyāvādīs, they also make the ultimate goal... Na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇum (SB 7.5.31). They do not understand that there is life, blissful life, by serving Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, here Arjuna is playing just like ordinary man. So he says to Kṛṣṇa, "You wanted me to fight, to become happy, to get the kingdom, but by killing my own men? Oh, nimittāni viparītāni. You are misleading me." Nimittāni ca paśyāmi viparītāni. "I'll not be happy by killing my own men. That is not possible. How You are inducing me?" So he said, nimittāni ca viparītāni paśyāmi. "No, no." Na ca śaknomy avasthātum: "I cannot stand here. Let me go back. Take my chariot back. I'll not stay here." Na ca śaknomy avasthātuṁ bhramatīva ca me manaḥ (BG 1.30). "I am becoming bewildered. I am puzzled now."

Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973:

So here, bhagavān uvāca. Vyāsadeva does not say that kṛṣṇa uvāca. If, if he would have said, "Kṛṣṇa," then people would have misunderstood. He's directly speaking, bhagavān uvāca, "the Supreme Personality of Godhead." So anyone who is impersonalist, how he can understand Bhagavad-gītā? Bhagavān means person. Bhagavān is not imperson. The Absolute Truth is manifested in three features: Brahman, Paramātmā, Bhagavān. Brahman is the beginning, impersonal. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Because... Just like fire. Fire is burning somewhere, but its heat and light is impersonal. Suppose here is big fire. Just like we got fireplace. That is in one corner. But the whole room you are feeling heat. That heat is impersonal. But the fireplace, where there is blazing fire, that is personal. So impersonal conception is the offshoot of the person. That will be explained in the Thirteenth Chapter: mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam (BG 9.4). Kṛṣṇa says that "Everyone, everywhere I am spread. I exist everywhere." How does He exist? By His energy. That energy is impersonal. But the Supreme Person, He's not impersonal. He's person. Therefore it is said, śrī-bhagavān uvāca. Bhagavān means who is full with six kinds of opulence, aiśvarya: the richest, the most famous, the most learned, the most beautiful, the most strong, and the most renouncer. He's Bhagavān. So Bhagavān is the ultimate understanding of the Absolute Truth. Just like when you feel temperature... Just like we feel temperature from the sunshine, heat. And light. The sun is giving heat and light. We enjoy the light and heat. But if you trace wherefrom this heat and light is coming, then you go to the sun planet. That is localized. That is not impersonal. And again, if you enter into the sun planet, then you will see the sun-god, Vivasvan. So we should not conclude final simply by heat and light. So Brahman understanding, impersonal understanding of the Absolute Truth, is imperfect understanding, partial understanding. It is not full understanding. Full understanding is Bhagavān. Therefore it is stated here, śrī-bhagavān uvāca. There cannot be any mistake. That is final.

Lecture on BG 2.3 -- London, August 4, 1973:

These transcendental activities of Kṛṣṇa, if anyone can understand, simply if anyone can understand, then he becomes liberated immediately. Liberated. Not liberated ordinary liberation, but for going back to home, back to Godhead. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti kaunteya (BG 4.9). The greatest liberation. There are different types of liberation also. Sāyujya sārūpya sārṣṭi sālokya sāyujya... (CC Madhya 6.266). Five kinds of liberation. So sāyujya means to merge into the existence, Brahman, brahma-laya (merging in the impersonal). That is also liberation. The Māyāvādīs or the jnani sampradāya, they want to merge into the existence, Brahman existence. That is also mukti. That is called sāyujya-mukti. But for a devotee, this sāyujya-mukti is just like hell. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate. So for Vaiṣṇava, kaivalyam, to, monism, to merge into the existence of the Supreme, is compared with hell. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate tri-daśa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpāyate (Caitanya-candrāmṛta 5). And the karmīs... Jñānīs are anxious to merge into the existence of the Brahman effulgence, and the karmīs, their highest aim is how to be elevated in the higher planetary system, Svarga-loka, where Lord Indra is there, or Brahmā is there. That is karmī's ambition, to go to the heaven. They all, except Vaiṣṇava philosophy, in all other literature, all other scripture, means Christian and Mohammedan, their aim is how to be elevated to the heaven.

Lecture on BG 2.7 -- London, August 7, 1973:

So in the animal life, it is not possible to change one's nature, which is given by the material energy, prakṛti. Prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni (BG 3.27). Kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo 'sya, kāraṇaṁ guṇa-sangaḥ asya sad-asad-janma-yoniṣu (BG 13.22). Why? All living entities are part and parcel of God. Therefore originally the characteristic of the living entity is as good as God. Simply it is a question of quantity. Quality is the same. Quality is the same. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ (BG 15.7). The same example. If you take a drop of sea water, the quality, the chemical composition is the same. But the quantity is different. It is a drop, and the sea is vast ocean. Similarly, we are exactly of the same quality as Kṛṣṇa. We can study. Why people say God is impersonal? If I am of the same quality, so God is also person, how He can be imperson? If, qualitatively, we are one, then as I feel individually, so why God should be refused individuality? This is another nonsense. The impersonalist rascals, they cannot understand what is the nature of God. In the Bible also it is said: "Man is made after God." You can study God's quality by studying your quality, or anyone's quality. Simply the difference is quantity's different. I have got some quality, some productive capacity. We also produce, every individual soul is producing something. But his production cannot be compared with production of God. That is the difference.

Lecture on BG 2.8 -- London, August 8, 1973:

So originally we are all persons, no imperson. Kṛṣṇa also says... He'll say that: "These soldiers, these kings, you and Me, My dear Arjuna, it is not that we did not exist in the past. Neither it is that in future we shall cease to exist." So this particular instruction of Kṛṣṇa, that: "I, You and all these kings and soldiers who have assembled here, they existed. As we are existing now, individual persons; similarly, they existed, individual persons. And in future also we shall exist as individual persons." So where is the question of imperson? These nonsense impersonalists, voidists. Therefore, the principle is to understand things in reality one has to approach Kṛṣṇa as Arjuna has approached, śiṣyas te 'ham: (BG 2.7) "Now I am Your disciple. You just teach me. Śādhi māṁ prapannam. I am surrendering. I am not trying to talk with You on equal level."

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Now, "Never there was a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor these people." Now He analytically says, "I, you, and..." first person, second person, and third person. That is complete. "I, you, and others." So Kṛṣṇa says, "Never there was a time when I, you, and all these persons who have assembled in this battlefield did not exist." That means "In the past, I, you, and all of them, they individually existed." Individually. The Māyāvādī theory is that the ultimate spirit is impersonal. Then how Kṛṣṇa can say that "Never there was a time when I, you, and all these persons never existed"? That means, "I existed as individual, you existed as individual, and all these persons who are before us, they existed as individuals. Never there was a time." Now, what is your answer, Dīnadayāla? Kṛṣṇa says never we were mixed up. We are all individuals. And He says, "Never we shall remain... Never there will be time when we shall not exist." That means in the past we existed as individuals, in the present there is no doubt we are existing as individual, and in the future also, we shall continue to remain as individuals. Then when the impersonal conception comes at all? In the past, present, future, there are three times. Huh? In all the times we are individuals. Then when God becomes impersonal or I become impersonal or you become impersonal? Where is the chance? Kṛṣṇa clearly says, "There was never time when I, you, and all these individual kings or soldiers... It was not that we did not exist in the past." So in the past we existed as individual, and in the present there is no doubt.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Now, the Māyāvādī says that this individuality is māyā. So their conception is that spirit, the whole spirit is a lump. Their theory is ghaṭākāśa poṭākāśa. Ghaṭākāśa poṭākāśa means... Just like sky. The sky is an expansion, impersonal expansion. So in a pot, in a waterpot, in a pitcher that is closed... Now, within the pitcher, there is also sky, a small sky. Now as soon as the pitcher is broken, the outside, the bigger sky, and the small sky within the pitcher mixes. That is Māyāvāda theory. But this analogy cannot be applied. Analogy means points of similarity. That is the law of analogy. The sky cannot be compared... The small sky within the pitcher cannot be compared with the living entity. It is material, matter. Sky is matter, and individual living entity is spirit. So how you can say? Just like a small ant, it is spirit soul. It has got its individuality. But a big dead stone, hill or mountain, it has no individuality. So matter has no individuality. Spirit has individuality. So if the points of similarity differ, then there is no analogy. That is the law of analogy. So you cannot analogize with matter and spirit. Therefore this analogy is fallacious. Ghaṭākāśa poṭākāśa. Then another evidence is in the Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa says that mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūta (BG 15.7). "This individual souls, they are My part and parcel." Jīva-loke sanātanaḥ. And they are eternal. That means eternally they are part and parcel. Then when... How this Māyāvāda theory can be supported, that due to māyā, being covered by māyā, they are now appearing individual, separate, but when the covering of māyā will be taken away, they will mix up just like the small sky within the pitcher and the big sky outside mixes? So this analogy is fallacious from logical point of view, as well as from authentic Vedic point of view.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Yes. He says that there was no such time when we are not individual, and there will be no such time in the future when we shall not remain individual. And so far present is concerned, we are all individual. You know. So where is the possibility of losing individuality? Become imperson? No. There is no possibility. This voidism, impersonalism, they are artificial ways of negating the perplexing variegatedness of this material existence. That is the negative side only. That is not a positive side. A positive side is that, as Kṛṣṇa says, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti kaunteya (BG 4.9). "After giving up this material tabernacle, one comes to Me." Just like after leaving this room, you have to enter another room. You cannot say that "After leaving this room, I shall live in the sky." Similarly, after leaving this body, if you go to Kṛṣṇa in the spiritual kingdom, your individuality will be there, but you'll have that spiritual body. When there is spiritual body there is no perplexities. Just like your body is different from the body of the aquatics. The aquatics, they have no disturbance in the water because their body is made like that. They can live there peacefully. You cannot live.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Just like your body is different from the body of the aquatics. The aquatics, they have no disturbance in the water because their body is made like that. They can live there peacefully. You cannot live. Similarly, the fishes, if you take them out of the water, they cannot live. Similarly, because you are spirit soul, you cannot live peacefully in this material world. This is foreign. But as soon as you enter into the spiritual world, your life is eternal, blissful and full of knowledge, real peace. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). Kṛṣṇa says, "After leaving this body, he does not come to this perplexities of material world." Mām eti, "He comes to Me." "Me" means His kingdom, His paraphernalia, His associates, everything. If some rich man or some king says, "All right, you come to me," that does not mean that he's impersonal. If a king says, "Come to..." means that he has got his palace, he has got his secretary, he has got his nice apartment, everything is there. How he can be imperson? But he says only, "Come to me." This "me" means everything. This "me" does not mean impersonal. And we get information from Brahma-saṁhitā, lakṣmī-sahasra-śata-sambhrama-sevyamānaṁ surabhīr abhipālayantam (Bs. 5.29). So He's not impersonal. He's raising cows, He's with hundreds and thousands of goddesses of fortune, His friends, His paraphernalia, His kingdom, His house, everything is there. So there is no question of impersonalism. Yes.

Lecture on BG 2.11 -- Edinburgh, July 16, 1972:

If one has actually studied himself, then he can understand God also. Now take, for example, "What I am." Even you meditate upon yourself, you can understand that you are an individual person. Individual person means you have got your own opinion, I have got my own opinion. Therefore sometimes we disagree. Because you are individual, I am individual. And because we are all individuals, as part and parcel of God, then God also must be individual. This is study. As I am a person, so God is also person. God cannot be imperson. If we take God as the original father, supreme father... The Christian religion believes. All other religion believes. And we also believe, Bhagavad-gītā. Because Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā (BG 14.4), "I am the original father of all living entities." So if God is father of all living entities and we all living entities, we are individual person, how God can be imperson? God is person. This is called philosophy; this is called logic.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:

J, N, A, N, I. "Jan-nanee. Jan-nanee." The spelling is "Jananee." So the Supreme Truth, the Supreme Truth is Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān, the Supreme Truth. Now, according to... Because we have already explained that each and every individual being has got his individual minute quantity of independence. God has given us. Now, by our independence, I may accept as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I may accept Him that the all-pervading Supersoul, and I may accept Him that the all-pervading Brahman, impersonal brahma-jyotir effulgence. So all these are applicable to the Absolute Truth. Now, it depends on my discretion whether I want to merge into the existence of the Lord, whether I want to keep my individuality and associate with Him as friend, as father, mother, as wife. Just like we have got relation. So that depends on my discretion. But now, comparatively, if we study that if we merge into the existence of God, the, at least, in the opinion of the bhaktas, that is not acceptable. That is not acceptable. They know that, that "God has created me as an individual being, so He has got some purpose. And because He has created me for some purpose, I must fulfill that purpose. I must fulfill that purpose."

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- Hyderabad, November 17, 1972:

So the Māyāvādī theory that impersonal, how it stands? Neither God is impersonal, nor the living entities are impersonal. Every one of us—person. The difference between the Supreme Person and our personality is that He is all-powerful; we are limited. Our power is limited. Everything, ours, limited. Aṇu, vibhu. He is great; we are small. He is infinite; we are infinitesimal, very small. Otherwise, in all other qualities, we are one. There is no difference. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). In eternity, in blissfulness, and in knowledge. Everything is there. But Kṛṣṇa's knowledge and our knowledge, different. Just like Kṛṣṇa said, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). "I spoke this yoga system, Bhagavad-gītā, long, long ago to the sun-god." Vivasvān manave prāha. "And the sun-god explained it to his son, Manu; and Manu again, in his turn, he explained to his son, Ikṣvāku. In this way, this knowledge of Bhagavad-gītā is coming by the disciplic succession."

Lecture on BG 2.13-17 -- Los Angeles, November 29, 1968:

It is my ignorance that I see that it is no more separate, it has mixed with the sky. Just like in the daytime we don't find any star in the sky. Due to the dazzling sunshine, we cannot see any stars. At night, we can see millions of stars, there are. Similarly, that is the impersonalism and personalism. One whose knowledge is not perfect, they think imperson, everything homogeneous. And one whose knowledge is perfect... Vedas also confirm it... Just like in the Īśopaniṣad, there is a verse in which it is stated that "Please withdraw Your effulgence so that I can see Your real face." Just like the sun globe. You cannot see it perfectly due to the dazzling sunshine. But the sun globe is there, and in the glow there are living entities, and there is a principal head man, god. They are not man because their body is made of fire. So similarly, the first, impersonal impression, Brahman, then further advanced, Supersoul, and when further advanced, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). First realization, Brahman, impersonal; the second realization is Paramātmā, Supersoul; and the last realization is the personal form of God, Kṛṣṇa. Go on.

Lecture on BG 2.14 -- Germany, June 21, 1974:

Therefore we are taking knowledge from Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Person, the perfect person. And He is advising that if you want to stop your pains and pleasure, then you must make some arrangement not to accept this material body. That He is advising, Kṛṣṇa, how to avoid this material body. That has been explained. This is Second Chapter. In the Fourth Chapter Kṛṣṇa has said that janma karma me divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti (BG 4.9). You simply try to understand the activities of Kṛṣṇa. These activities of Kṛṣṇa is there in the history, in the Mahābhārata. Mahābhārata means greater India or greater Bhārata, Mahābhārata, the history. In that history this Bhagavad-gītā is also there. So He is speaking about Himself. You try to understand Kṛṣṇa. This is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Simply try to understand Kṛṣṇa, His activities. He is not impersonal. Janma karma me divyam. Karma means activities. He has activities.

Lecture on BG 2.20 -- Hyderabad, November 25, 1972:

So nirviśeṣa, without varieties, there cannot be any ānanda. Variety is the mother of enjoyment. So we are trying to... We are disgusted with these material varieties. Therefore some is trying to make these varieties zero and some is trying to make these varieties impersonal. But that will not give us the exact transcendental pleasure. If you can go up into the Brahman effulgence and take shelter of Kṛṣṇa or Nārāyaṇa... There are innumerable planets in the Brahman effulgence. They are called Vaikuṇṭhaloka. And the topmost Vaikuṇṭhaloka is called Goloka Vṛndāvana. So if you are fortunate enough to take shelter in one of these planets, then you are eternally happy in blissful condition of knowledge. Otherwise, simply to merge into the Brahman effulgence is not very safe. Because we want ānanda. So in impersonal zero standard there cannot be any ānanda. But because we have no information, the Māyāvādī philosophers, of the Vaikuṇṭha planets, they come back again to these material planets. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Adhaḥ means in this material world. That I have explained many times. There are so many big, big sannyāsīs. They give up this material world as mithyā, jagan mithyā, and take sannyāsa, and then again, after a few days, they come to social service, politics. Because they could not realize what is Brahman. They, for ānanda, they have to take part in these material activities. Because ānanda... We want ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). So if there is no spiritual ānanda, there must be, they must come to the inferior quality. This material world is inferior quality. Aparā. If we cannot get spiritual ānanda, or superior pleasure, then we have to take this material pleasure. Because we want pleasure. Everyone searching after pleasure.

Lecture on BG 2.21-22 -- London, August 26, 1973:

So this proves that the spiritual body is not impersonal. It is not a zero, it is, it has got form. But the form is so minute, aṇor aṇīyān mahato mahīyān: one form is lesser than the atom. Aṇor aṇīyān mahato mahīyān. Two forms are there spiritual. One is the Supreme Lord's form, virāḍ-rūpa, mahato mahīyān, and our form, aṇor aṇīyān, lesser than the atom. That is stated in the Kaṭha Upaniṣad. Aṇor aṇīyān mahato mahīyān ātmāsya jantor nihito guhāyām. Nihito guhāyām, guhāyām means in the heart. Both of them are there. Now find out modern science. Both the soul and the Supersoul, they are situated within the heart. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe (BG 18.61). It is not said that "Anywhere in the body it is sitting." No. Hṛd-deśe, in the heart. And actually, by medical science, the heart is the center of all activities of the body, office. And the brain is the manager. The director is there, Kṛṣṇa. He says also in another place, sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭaḥ. Everything is clear. Sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭaḥ, "I am sitting in everyone's heart." Find out God, find out Kṛṣṇa. In several places, all Vedic literature, guhāyām. Guhāyām means in the heart. Sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca (BG 15.15). The supreme director, Kṛṣṇa, is sitting there, and He is directing, "Now this living entity wants to fulfill his desire in this way." He's giving direction to the material nature. "Now, prepare a vehicle, body, for this rascal in this way. He wants to enjoy. All right, let him enjoy." This is going on.

Lecture on BG 2.23 -- Hyderabad, November 27, 1972:

The sky is also matter. But in the sky, there is no variety. If you want varieties, even in this material world, then you have to take shelter of a planet, either you come to the earthly planet or go to the moon planet or sun planet. Similarly, the Brahman effulgence is the glowing rays from the body of Kṛṣṇa. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). Just like the sunshine is glowing effulgence from the sun globe, and within the sun globe, there is the sun-god, similarly, there is, in the spiritual world, there is Brahman effulgence, impersonal, and within the Brahman effulgence, there are spiritual planets. They are called Vaikuṇṭhalokas. And the topmost of the Vaikuṇṭhalokas is Kṛṣṇaloka. So from Kṛṣṇa's body, the Brahman effulgence is coming out. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). Everything is existing in that Brahman effulgence. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. In the Bhagavad-gītā also it is said, mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni nāhaṁ teṣu avasthitaḥ (BG 9.4). Everything existing on His effulgence, Brahman effulgence...

Lecture on BG 2.23 -- Hyderabad, November 27, 1972:

Just like the whole material world, innumerable planets, they are existing on the sunshine. The sunshine is impersonal effulgence of the sun globe, and there are millions of planets resting on the sunshine. Everything is happening on, on account of the sunshine. Similarly the Brahman effulgence coming out, the rays coming out from the body of Kṛṣṇa, and everything is resting on that Brahman effulgence. Actually, different types of energies. Just like from the sunshine there are different types of colors, energies. That is creating this material world. Just like we can experience practically. When there is no sunshine in Western countries, when there is snow, all the leaves of the tree immediately falls down. It is called fall, the season. It remains only wood, piece of wood only. Again, when there is spring season, the sunshine is available, all at a time, they become green. So as the sunshine is working in this material world, similarly the ultimate bodily rays of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the origin of all creation. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). On account of the Brahman effulgence, millions and millions of brahmāṇḍas, or universes, are coming out.

Lecture on BG 2.23-24 -- London, August 27, 1973:

Nainaṁ chindanti śastrāṇi nainaṁ dahati pāvakaḥ. Another study from this verse is that the Māyāvāda philosophy, they say that spirit is one. The Supreme Spirit, impersonal. When the spirit is embodied, it becomes individual. This is their philosophy. Otherwise, they give the example... Just like there is water on the sea. It is also sustained on the earth. A big mass of water. And on that water, you can put one boat or ship full of water. And on that boat, you put another, a cup of water, and in the cup of water, you put another pot, a small cup or small utensil or even the skin of a grain, that will also contain. So their philosophy is that the water is one, but according to the pot or container, it becomes small and big. This is their philosophy. And when the container is broken, then the whole water becomes one. This is their philosophy. Now this nonsense philosophy is refuted in this verse. How? Now because spirit, either you take whole spirit or part spirit, nainaṁ chindanti śastrāṇi. You cannot divide it by cutting into pieces. That is not possible. So their philosophy is that the water has been put into different pots, therefore we see this small water, this smaller or bigger, this division. But they are all individual always. It is not that it has been divided. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ jīva-loke sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7).

Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Los Angeles, December 6, 1968:

So actually Brahmā is the son of Viṣṇu, and Manu is the son of Brahmā, and we are also son of Manu in different aspect. So gradually, if you go up, God comes to be our original father. And we say also, God is the original father. And the history, Vedic history, also says like that. So God... Because we have got form, therefore God has form, must be. Just like my father had form; so I have got this form. This is commonsense knowledge. How my father can be impersonal? Unless my father was a person, how I am a person? If God is the original father, He must be a person. Otherwise how we are persons? These are common sense, knowledge. There is no need of very great knowledge. A child can understand. How you can say God is impersonal? If God is the father, original, then how He can be impersonal? What do you say? Can anybody say, "Yes, He can be impersonal in this way"? God cannot be impersonal. He is person. And we get so many information. Kṛṣṇa says Himself that "In the past I was a person, you were a person, and all these men who have assembled here in the battlefield, they are also persons. We existed in the past as persons, and we shall continue to exist as individual persons. So at least we cannot, we Vaiṣṇava followers of Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, we cannot accept, neither there is any reason behind it. What do you think? Huh?

Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Hyderabad, November 30, 1972:

So this Personality of Godhead... It is a fact. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). The last word is Bhagavān. From Bhagavān, the expansion is Paramātmā, localized aspect. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). That is expansion. Ekāṁśena sthito jagat (BG 10.42). That is one of the plenary portions. Viṣṭabhya aham. He enters within this universe, and therefore the universe becomes manifest. Just like I am soul, dehino 'smin yathā dehe (BG 2.13), I enter into this body. You enter into your body. Therefore the body expands. Similarly, the Supreme Personality of Godhead enters as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu within each and every universe. Then it becomes manifest. So there is no question of impersonal.

Lecture on BG 2.28 -- London, August 30, 1973:

Therefore, Vyāsadeva saw, apaśyat puruṣaṁ pūrṇam. He saw... Just like in airplane, you go above the cloud. The sun is not affected at all by the cloud. Although below the airplane you'll see vast mass of cloud. Similarly, māyā cannot affect Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, Bhagavad-gītā says daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā. Mama māyā (BG 7.14), Kṛṣṇa says, "My illusory energy." Kṛṣṇa is never affected by the illusory energy. Exactly like the cloud. But the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that when impersonal Absolute Truth comes, appears, they also accept the incarnation, but their philosophy is that ultimately the Absolute Truth is impersonal. When He appears as a person, He accepts the māyā body. This is Māyāvāda. Kṛṣṇa may be accepted as the Supreme God, but He has accepted a material body. That means they want to compare Kṛṣṇa with ordinary living entity, and that is condemned in the Bhagavad-gītā. It is said that avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). Because Kṛṣṇa comes in His original form... Original form is two-handed. It is also accepted in the Bible: "Man is made after the image of God." So God has got two-handed. Even the four-handed Viṣṇu form is not the original form. Viṣṇu form is secondary manifestation of Saṅkarṣaṇa. So Kṛṣṇa is never affected by māyā. This is point.

Lecture on BG 2.46-62 -- Los Angeles, December 16, 1968:

That's a fact. Brahman is not greater than Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is greater than Brahman. Mattaḥ parataro nāsti. You will find in the Bhagavad-gītā, "There is no more greater truth than Me." These people, they cannot understand; less intelligent. The same example. Because they see that the sunshine is spreading all over the universe, therefore it is more important, greater than the sun planet. But actually it is not. The simple truth. And if you go into the sun planet you will find Vivasvān the sun-god is there. The sun planet is so dazzling due to his presence. Similarly, with all impersonal conception, when you reach Kṛṣṇa, then you reach to the goal. There are so many crude examples. Just like your country. There are so many departmental government businesses going on. This department, that department, all over the country. The whole thing is concentrate in the President. How can I deny it? The everything is going on on the finger's end of the President. This is a crude example. Similarly, ultimately, unless there is the Supreme Person on the background... That, Hayagrīva has brought one book, Evidence of God. So the many scientists they have written in that book, and they have agreed that if God is there, He must be person. He must be person. Is not that, Hayagrīva?

Lecture on BG 2.46-62 -- Los Angeles, December 16, 1968:

Yes. Very big, big scientists, astronomers, mathematicians, they have written in that book, Evidence of Existence of God. And they have all agreed that if there is God at all, He must be person. He cannot be imperson. And God says personally, "There is no greater truth than Me. Arjuna, there is no greater truth than Me." Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ (BG 10.8), "I am the source of all energy." So God says, Arjuna says, Vyāsa says, Nārada says; why should we hear a street man? (laughter) (Prabhupāda laughs) A man in the street, is he greater than Nārada? Is he greater than Vyāsa? He is greater than Kṛṣṇa? Then why should I hear him? You should ask him, "Please, keep your theory with you. We are greater authority than you." Yes. Yes?

Lecture on BG 2.48-49 -- New York, April 1, 1966:

Kṛpaṇāḥ means those who are anxious for enjoying sense gratification, by the fruits of their labor. They are called kṛpaṇa. And those who have sacrificed the whole body, whole intelligence... Sacrifice... You always remember: what we can sacrifice? Just like we take Ganges water from Ganges and offering Ganges, so everything is obtained from God, and now, if we offer the same thing to God, then we become liberated. Actually I am not proprietor in anything. Myself is also not... I am also the part and parcel of the Supreme Lord. These are the conception. Without this conception, without this God conception, there is no spiritual realization and there is no happiness, either personally, or impersonally, or socially, or economically or politically. There cannot be.

Lecture on BG 3.27 -- Madras, January 1, 1976:

The personal form and impersonal form, there are two conception. But Kṛṣṇa explains this that mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4). Avyaktam, impersonal. That is another form of Kṛṣṇa. He says, mayā: "By Me." "I am all-pervading." Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. That is sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Because He is expanded everywhere, that is impersonal. And... But as māyā, He says, "by Me." Then He's person. So the whole creation is Kṛṣṇa's expansion of energy.

Just like the sunshine. Sunshine is also the same quality, heat and light, as the sun globe or the sun god. But the sunshine is impersonal, and the sun globe is localized. And within the sun globe there is sun god. So that is the main source of everything. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ pratiṣṭhā. The brahma-jyotir is also staying in Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is the source of brahma-jyotir. So impersonal or personal, whatever you take, that is Brahman. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11).

But the beginning, origin, is Kṛṣṇa. That Kṛṣṇa explains, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8). Either you take impersonal Brahman or localized Paramātmā, whatever you take, that is emanation from Kṛṣṇa. Sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1).

Lecture on BG 3.27 -- Madras, January 1, 1976:

So, of course, if you worship impersonal form, brahma-jyotir, that is also Kṛṣṇa. But Kṛṣṇa has said, kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). If you want to approach the Absolute Truth through the impersonal form, then it will be little difficult. Perhaps you may not reach the ultimate goal. You may fall down. There are so many instances. We have seen in India so many big, big sannyāsīs. They give up this world—brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā—but after some days they come down to the jagat and engage themselves in political... (break)

Why? They could not stay in the Brahman stage. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. By concentrating on the impersonal form they think that they have become liberated but actually that is not. Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. So impersonal conception is not purified intelligence. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. You may think that "I have become liberated," but it is not. Why? Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). After so much trouble and austerity, penances, you may acquire the position in the impersonal Brahman, but there is chance of falling down from there. Patanty adhaḥ.

Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ: "Because they could not find out how to worship Your lotus feet." So unless you come to the personal form of the Absolute Truth, there is difficulty and there is chance of falling down.

Lecture on BG 3.31-43 -- Los Angeles, January 1, 1969:

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Forty-three: "Thus knowing oneself to be transcendental to material senses, mind, and intelligence, one should control the lower self by the higher self, and thus, by spiritual strength, conquer this insatiable enemy known as lust (BG 3.43)."

Purport: "This third chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā is conclusively directed to Kṛṣṇa consciousness through knowing oneself as the eternal servitor of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, without considering impersonal voidness as the ultimate end. In the material existence of life, one is certainly influenced by propensities of lust and desire for dominating the resources of material nature. Such desire for overlording and sense gratification are the greatest enemies of the conditioned soul, but by the..."

Prabhupāda: Generally, those who are under the bodily concept of life, they are struggling day and night. Why? Now, to have overlordship of this material nature. This is material activities. And those who are on the mental platform, they are trying to philosophize, mental speculation. Those who are still intelligent, they are taking to this yoga practice by intelligently trying to controlling the senses. But as soon as you come to the spiritual platform, automatically these things are done because all your senses, mind, and intelligence are occupied by Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Go on. Yes, go on.

Lecture on BG 4.3-6 -- New York, July 18, 1966:

Even Śaṅkarācārya, who is, who has got a different opinion from the Personality of Godhead. Because we, we, the Vaiṣṇavas, we are, we accept the personal Godhead, but there are other philosophers who do not accept the personal feature of the Supreme Absolute Truth. Śaṅkarācārya was the head of this impersonal school. Still, he has admitted in his commentation of Bhagavad-gītā that sa kṛṣṇaḥ svayaṁ bhagavān: "Oh, Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord. He's the Supreme Lord." So Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord, and He's accepted.

Now, now Śrī Kṛṣṇa says that "This Bhagavad-gītā, this science of Bhagavad-gītā, was first spoken by Me to the sun-god, sun-god. So whatever I am speaking to you, Arjuna, it is not a new thing." The Vedic knowledge, whatever Vedic knowledge you know, it is not, nothing like some discovery of knowledge. No. Everything is old, revealed knowledge. Everything is old, revealed knowledge. Going on. Just like history repeats itself. Just like this is, this is summer season. It is no new newcomer. The summer season comes. You know in your life. The summer season came last year, and again it has come. And we can foretell also that in the month of December there will be winter season. It is not foretelling. It is going on like that, circle. So everything is rotating, history is repeating. So knowledge, whatever knowledge is there, that is not a new thing. It is all old.

Lecture on BG 4.7-10 -- Los Angeles, January 6, 1969:

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "The impersonalists and the yogis attain liberation only after much trouble and many, many births. Even then the liberation they achieve, merging into the impersonal Brahmajyoti effulgence of the Lord, is only partial, and there is a risk of returning again to this material world. But the devotee, simply by understanding the transcendental nature of the body and the activities of the Lord, attains the abode of the Lord after ending this body and does not run the risk of returning again to this material world. In the Brahma-saṁhitā it is stated that the Lord has many, many forms and incarnations. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Although there are many transcendental forms of the Lord, they are still one and the same Supreme Personality of Godhead. One has to understand this fact with conviction although it is incomprehensible to mundane scholars and empiric philosophers. As stated in the Vedas: eko devo nitya-līlānurakto bhakta-vyāpī hṛdy antarātmā: 'The one Supreme Personality of Godhead is eternally engaged in many many transcendental forms in relationships with His unalloyed devotees.' This Vedic version is confirmed in this verse of the Bhagavad-gītā personally by the Lord. Anyone who accepts this truth on the strength of the authority of the Vedas and of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and who does not waste time in philosophical speculation obtains the highest perfectional stage of liberation."

Prabhupāda: Yes. This is very important point. The process of understanding knowledge. The modern tendency is to understand by dint of one's sense perception. That is not possible. There are many things, especially spiritual matters; nobody can understand by simple speculation. So one has to accept the authority. So according to Vedic culture, the Vedas are the authority. If there is some information in the Vedas, you accept it, authority. That is very nice system.

Lecture on BG 4.7-10 -- Los Angeles, January 6, 1969:

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Therefore people in general keep the same bodily idea in mind when they are informed of the personal form of the Lord. For such materialistic men the form of the gigantic material manifestation is Supreme. Therefore they imagine that the Supreme is impersonal. And because they are too materially absorbed, the concept of retaining a personality after liberation from matter frightens them. When such materialistic men are informed that spiritual life is also individual and personal, they are afraid of becoming persons again, and so they naturally prefer a kind of merging into the impersonal void. Generally, they compare the living entities to the bubbles of the ocean which merge into the ocean. That is the highest perfection of spiritual existence attainable without individual personality. This is a fearful stage of life, devoid of perfect knowledge of spiritual existence. Furthermore, there are many persons who cannot understand spiritual existence at all. Being embarrassed by so many theories and by contradictions and various types of philosophical speculation, they become disgusted or angry, and foolishly they conclude that there is no supreme cause and that everything is ultimately void. Such people are in diseased conditions of life. Some of them are too materially attached and therefore do not give attention to spiritual life, some of them want to merge into the supreme spiritual cause, and some of them disbelieve in everything, being angry at all sorts of spiritual speculation out of hopelessness. This last class of men take to the shelter of some kind of intoxication, and their respective hallucinations are sometimes accepted as spiritual visions. One has to get rid of all three stages of attachment to the material world: the negligence of spiritual life, fear of spiritual, personal identity, and the concept of void that underlies the frustration of life. To get free of these three stages in the material concept of life, one has to take complete shelter of the Lord, guided by the bona fide spiritual master, and follow the penances of disciplinary and regulative principles of devotional life. The last stage of such devotional life is called bhāva, or transcendental love of Godhead.

"According to Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, the science of devotional service: 'In the beginning one must have a preliminary desire for self-realization. This will bring one to the stage of trying to associate with persons who are spiritually elevated. The next stage is that one becomes initiated by an elevated spiritual master, and under the instruction of the spiritual master the neophyte devotee begins the process of devotional service. By execution of devotional service under the guidance of the spiritual master, one becomes free from all material attachment and attains steadiness in self-realization, and acquires a taste for hearing about the Absolute Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. This taste leads one further forward to the attachment for Kṛṣṇa, the attachment for Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And this Kṛṣṇa consciousness is mature in bhāva, or the preliminary stage of transcendental love of Godhead. When the devotee reaches the stage of real love for Godhead, it is called prema, the highest perfection of life.' In the prema stage there is a constant engagement in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. So by the slow process of devotional service under the guidance of the bona fide spiritual master, one can attain the bhāva stage, being free from all material attachment, from the fearfulness of one's individual spiritual personality and from the frustration of voidness. And when one is actually free from such lower stages of life, one can attain to the abode of the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

Prabhupāda: That's it. Hare Kṛṣṇa. Any question? You discuss Bhagavad-gītā. If somebody has got any difficulty to understand or any question, they can, he can clear it up. This class is meant for understanding. So we should try to understand clearly what is discussed. So if there is any question, you can put.

Tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā (BG 4.34). Spiritual understanding is possible by surrender, by question, and by service. The question should be made to a person where you can surrender, and that person where you surrender must be rendered service. This is the process.

Lecture on BG 4.7-10 -- Los Angeles, January 6, 1969:

Madhudviṣa: Prabhupāda, in this Vedic verse, tat tvam asi, is this where the Māyāvādīs, have begin their impersonal philosophy, "Thou art that," or...?

Prabhupāda: Yes. We also. We cannot deny the Vedic version. Tat tvam asi is a Vedic version. So either you are Māyāvādī or Vaiṣṇava, you cannot deny it.

Just like two lawyers are arguing in the court. The medium is the law court. So neither of them can deny the law court, but one has to establish his convictions by argument, by logic. So similarly, tat tvam asi is the code of Vedic principle or Vedas, "You are that." Tat tvam asi. Tat means that supreme spirit. "You are." So our philosophy, Vaiṣṇava philosophy, we begin from this point. As Kṛṣṇa began Bhagavad-gītā from the point that "You are not this body," we begin from this version, tat tvam asi. Tat tvam asi. "You are not this." That means "What I am?" Then I must be something; otherwise what is my identity? That reply is your identity is that "You are as good as God." That means you are qualitatively the same. Tat tvam asi. Qualitatively you are...

The mistake of the Māyāvāda philosophy is that "You are the same." You are the same in which way? I am the same in quality, not in quantity. Just like if I say, "You are as good as President Nixon," there is nothing wrong because you are American, he is American. Is there anything wrong? From the point of view, American citizenship, you are as good as President Nixon. But when you go deep into the matter, you will find, oh, you are far, far away from President Nixon. Similarly, we are identifying ourself with this matter, but Vedas says that "You are not matter. You are supreme spirit soul." Not supreme, "You are spirit soul."

Lecture on BG 4.7-10 -- Los Angeles, January 6, 1969:

Similarly, if you can understand yourself, then you can understand even God. If you study yourself, that "Although I am very small..." What to speak of myself? Even a small ant, it has got individuality. A ant is going on. You stop it. It will struggle. That means it wants to keep its individuality. Therefore, if you are the same, then God is also individual. He is not impersonal. Immediately you can understand. How you can...? I have got so much... I am so small, tiny; still, I have got my individuality, personality, and how God can be impersonal? Even a common sense man can understand.

Lecture on BG 4.9-11 -- New York, July 25, 1966:

And the next stage is bhaya. Bhaya. And what is that bhaya? Fear. Now, that... (aside:) Please don't talk. Bhaya means that... There are persons, transcendentalists, who are culturing transcendental knowledge, but they are very much afraid of conceiving that there is another world which is spiritual world, and that is also similar like this world, and the Personality of Godhead is there, and we have to go there, and we have to live as His servitor. So we carry the ideas of this world to that world. Therefore we are afraid. There are many transcendentalists who like the impersonal conception of the Supreme Truth. As soon as personal conception of the Supreme Truth is presented there, they are afraid of: "Oh, it is something material. It is not real." This is called bhaya. But actually it is not that.

Lecture on BG 4.9-11 -- New York, July 25, 1966:

So here Kṛṣṇa also give us instruction that vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhāḥ (BG 2.56). There are persons who are too much attached to these material activities. They are called rāga. They are in the atmosphere of rāga. And there are persons who are atmosphere of fear: "Oh, again we have got to..., a personal life?" They are afraid of personal life. They want to make impersonal everything. That is called bhaya. And the first, second... And the third is krodha. They do not believe in any philosophy. "Let us commit suicide. Let us annihilate all this material existence." So we have to surpass. We have to surpass these three stage of attachment and fearfulness and krodha, and anger. When he is disgusted with this life, he commits suicide. That is called krodha, by anger. So we have to surpass all these stages. So Lord Kṛṣṇa says, vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhāḥ: "After surpassing these three stages of life," vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhā man-mayā mām upāśritāḥ (BG 4.10), "one who is constantly conscious of Me," man-mayā, and mām upāśritāḥ, "and accepting the shelter of My protection," mām upāśritāḥ, bahavo jñāna-tapasā, "there were many sages who by culture of knowledge and penance," bahavo jñāna pūtā, "purified by that process," mad-bhāvam āgatāḥ, "they attained My superior nature, My superior nature."

Lecture on BG 4.11 -- Bombay, March 31, 1974:

What is that? Now, Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān. The Absolute Truth is described in different ways by different people according to angle of vision. But the object is the same. There may be different types of religious systems, but the object is Kṛṣṇa. Somewhere it is openly expressed, and somewhere it is covered. Just like Brahman, Brahman realization, impersonal realization, Brahman realization.

For the jñānīs, those who are seeking out the Absolute Truth by speculative knowledge, they want to make these varieties of material world as void. The Buddha philosophy, śūnyavādi. Because they are disgusted with these material varieties, therefore they want something opposite. That opposite is voidism, śūnyavāda. The śūnyavāda or, little more further, that is brahmavāda, without any varieties, simply the light, brahma-jyotir. This is also another realization. Śūnyavāda, to make this material world null and void, they come to the impersonal Brahman effulgence. This is Brahman realization.

Lecture on BG 4.11 -- Bombay, March 31, 1974:

This is the process. So artificially, the Buddha philosophy or Śaṅkara philosophy, they, artificially if you want to make it nirvāṇa, zero, that is not possible. Avyaktāsakta-cetasām... Te..., kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). Avyakta means zero, impersonal. If you become attached to simply making zero, or impersonal, that is not possible. Because we are accustomed. We are... As living beings, we want varieties. Variety is the mother of enjoyment. We cannot remain in the zero position.

You have got experience. Just like when you fly on the plane, after some hours, four, five hours, you become disgusted. You want to come down. Everyone has got this experience. Because the sky is zero, we cannot remain there more than four or five hours or six hours. We must come down. In the sea also. We have got all these experience. If you remain on the ocean for three, four days... Because it runs on. When I first went to America, I went by ship. So thirty-five days. So after four, five days, it was disgusting. As soon as we saw one island, then we became relieved. (Laughter) You see?

Lecture on BG 4.11 -- Bombay, March 31, 1974:

The same example. You may go very high. Just like nowadays, the attempt is being made. They are going to the moon planet or Venus planet. We do not know whether they are going or not, but we hear from the advertisement. So because they do not get any shelter, they come back. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Because they do not get any shelter, the shelter of lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, from this impersonal conception of philosophy, they again come to this material world.

Therefore you'll find there are so many big, big swamis. First of all they give up this world. Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. "This world is mithyā. Let us take to Brahman. Let us become Brahman." But after keeping in, some days in so-called Brahman, they again come back to open hospital, school. Because there they could not get anything. Therefore something must be done, profession. So open hospital and raise fund. That's all.

Lecture on BG 4.11 -- Bombay, March 31, 1974:

Then Śaṅkarācārya came. Śaṅkarācārya wanted... Because by the propagation of Lord Buddha, whole India became Buddhist. And Śaṅkarācārya wanted to establish Vedas again. So they were temporary necessities, for certain reason. Because people were addicted so much in violence, in killing the animals, therefore Buddha philosophy was needed. Again, this Buddha philosophy was driven out. The Śaṅkara, impersonal philosophy was established. But again, the ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya and other Vaiṣṇava ācāryas.. . At last, Caitanya Mahāprabhu. They established that brahma satyam means brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). Both, three, Absolute Truth.

Lecture on BG 4.11-18 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1969:

Prabhupāda: This is page one-hundred-eighteen, yes.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "All of them as they surrender unto Me, I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Pṛthā." Purport: "Everyone is searching after Kṛṣṇa in the different aspects of His manifestation. Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is partially realized in His impersonal brahma-jyotir or shining effulgence. Kṛṣṇa is also partially realized as the all-pervading Supersoul dwelling within everything, even in the particles of atoms."

Prabhupāda: It (the microphone) is not fixed up right.

Lecture on BG 4.11-18 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1969:

God realization, there are three aspects: brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). The Absolute Truth is realized in three aspects—Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. Brahman, the impersonal conception of the absolute truth, that is called Brahman. And Paramātmā is localized aspect of the Absolute Truth. And Bhagavān is the ultimate realization, Personality of Godhead.

The same example as I have given several times in these classes, that the light, sunlight, is realized first of all as sunshine. Then if you can go further the sun planet, up to the sun planet, that is localized aspect. And if you enter into the sun planet then you'll find the sun-god is there. He is person.

The same example is in the case of absolute truth. The impersonal realization is not ultimate realization. Ultimate realization is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is supported in Brahma-saṁhitā. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). By expansion of Lord's personal effulgence, the Brahman realization is there.

Lecture on BG 4.11-18 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1969:

So the persons who are trying to understand the absolute truth by exercising their imperfect knowledge, they reach up to the impersonal conception. And persons who are still further advanced, just like yogis. They are trying to meditate upon the localized aspect of the absolute truth, the Paramātmā, the Supersoul, they're little further advanced. But persons who have realized the Supreme Personality of Godhead, they are supposed to be the ultimate realizer. So God is realized by all of them but not on the same level.

The example, another example. Just like from a very distant place you see one hill. You will find just like it is a cloud. If you go further near you will see it is something green. And if you reach the mountain then you will see there are so many trees, so many animals, houses and living beings. The same example can be given here. One who is observing the absolute truth from a very distant place, their conception is impersonal. One who is further advanced, their conception is localized. God is situated in everyone's heart. That is localized.

Lecture on BG 4.11-18 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1969:

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Such impersonalists do not agree to accept the eternal, blissful Personality of Godhead and consequently they cannot relish the bliss of transcendental personal service to the Lord, having extinguished their individuality. Some of them who are not situated even in the impersonal existence return to this material field to exhibit their dormant desires for activities. They are not admitted into the spiritual planets but they again are given a chance to act on the material planets. For those who are fruitive workers the Lord awards the desired results of their prescribed duties as the yajñeśvara; and those who are yogis seeking mystic powers are awarded such powers. In other words, everyone is dependent for success upon His mercy alone and all kinds of spiritual processes are but different degrees of success on the same path. Unless, therefore, one comes to the highest perfection of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, all attempts remain imperfect, as is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: 'Whether one is without desire (the condition of the devotees) or is desirous of all fruitive results, or is after liberation, one should with all efforts try to worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead for complete perfection culminating in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.' "

Prabhupāda: Yes. This verse refers to the statement of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam wherein it is stated that

akāmaḥ sarva-kāmo vā

mokṣa-kāma udāra-dhīḥ

tīvreṇa bhakti-yogena

yajeta puruṣaṁ param

(SB 2.3.10)

The idea is that there are three class of men. One class of men they are simply desiring material comforts, desiring. They want nice house, nice wife, nice comfortable life, everything nice for the comfort of this body. They are called sarva-kāma. Sarva-kāma means their desire has no end.

Lecture on BG 4.11-18 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1969:

Just like in the modern materialistic world they are trying to improve material comforts but they do not know when does it end. One after another, one after another, one after another. Therefore they are called sarva-kāma, unlimitedly desiring. There is no end of desiring. Such persons, akāma. And akāma means one who has no desire. Just like those who are devotees, Kṛṣṇa conscious, they have no desire. They don't like any material comforts, any material improvements. They want simply Kṛṣṇa. Akāmaḥ sarva-kāmo vā and mokṣa-kāma (SB 2.3.10). Mokṣa-kāma means one who is disgusted with these material desires and aspires after something void, impersonal, or freedom from all these desires, mokṣa-kāma.

Lecture on BG 4.19-25 -- Los Angeles, January 9, 1969:

Prabhupāda: That's it. Question? Yes?

Devotee: (indistinct) eternally individual, so how do the impersonalists (?) attaining their goal merge into the impersonal brahma-jyotir?

Prabhupāda: That is their sign of less intelligence. Therefore we call the impersonalist as less intelligent. Just like the same example, the child is thinking that the constable is very important man. Similarly, the impersonalists are less intelligent in this sense, that what is this brahma-jyotir? The brahma-jyotir is combination of atomic spiritual sparks. Just like sunshine is combination of molecular shining particles. This is scientific. Anything you take, either take sunshine or fire or water, you'll find atomic, even earth, they are all atomic, small, very small parts. Similarly, the brahma-jyotir is combination of the atomic spiritual sparks who are individual living entities.

So they may merge into that existence of brahma-jyotir but because every individual living entity has got individual desires, therefore they cannot exist very long in that individual condition, I mean to say, impersonal condition. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Any person who is thinking that by merging, or one who has already merged into the brahma-jyotir, he has become liberated. Bhāgavata says that is not intelligence, what to speak of liberation. He says ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. Vimukta-māninaḥ means he is simply falsely thinking that he is liberated. Māninaḥ. Just like you think yourself, just like so many rascals, he is thinking, "I am God," you see. "I am God."

Lecture on BG 4.20 -- Bombay, April 9, 1974:

So Vaiṣṇavas also say, yas tu nārāyaṇaṁ devaṁ brahma-rudrādi-daivataiḥ. Brahmā, Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva, they are demigods of this material world. So if one puts Nārāyaṇa even with the label of Brahmā and Rudra, Lord Śiva and Lord Brahmā... They are very exalted, big demigods. Lord Śiva is almost like Nārāyaṇa. Nārāyaṇa is ninety-five percent complete God, and Lord Śiva is eighty-five percent and Kṛṣṇa is cent percent. There is analysis. So yas tu nārāyaṇaṁ devaṁ brahma-rudrādi-daivataiḥ, samatvenaiva vīkṣeta. Samatvena, equal "Well, whatever is Nārāyaṇa, that is also Lord Śiva, that is also Lord Brahmā, that is also goddess Kālī." This is Māyāvāda. Because the Māyāvāda philosophy is that "The Absolute Truth is impersonal. That is the final understanding. So because we cannot think of impersonal, meditate upon that, let us imagine some form." Sādhakānāṁ hitvārthāya brahmaṇo rūpa-kalpanaḥ.(?) The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that kalpana, "You just imagine any form." Therefore they especially recommend the five forms, the five form: the Sūrya, sun-god, Gaṇeśa and Durgā, Viṣṇu and Lord Śiva.

Lecture on BG 4.24 -- Bombay, April 13, 1974:

This (is) all right, but wherefrom this Brahman is emanating? That Para-brahman. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Brahman is also emanating. Brahmaṇo 'haṁ pratiṣṭhā. Everything Brahman is situated on Para-brahman. Therefore He is described as paraṁ dhāma. Dhāma means the platform. Just like we stand on the surface of the globe. So similarly, there must be some standing. Just like the light is coming. Wherefrom the light is coming? The standing is the lamp. If the lamp is broken, there is no more light.

Similarly, the brahma-jyotir, wherefrom it is coming? Where is the source? So brahma-jyotir, the impersonal brahma-jyotir is not ultimate. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate.

vadanti tat tattva-vidas

tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam

brahmeti paramātmeti

bhagavān iti śabdyate

(SB 1.2.11)

The Absolute Truth is one, either you say Brahman, or Para-brahman or Bhagavān, but still, there is grades of realization. Brahman realization is impersonal realization. Paramātmā realization is localized. And Bhagavān realization is the perfect, ultimate realization. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti.

Lecture on BG 4.24 -- Bombay, April 13, 1974:

That is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "Anyone who has neglected Your personality," aravindākṣa, "O the lotus-eyed Kṛṣṇa," aravindākṣe, ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa tvayy asta-bhāvāt, "they cannot understand what You are." Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ: "Their intelligence is still contaminated, not purified." Aviśuddha. Then what is the result? The result is āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "After severe austerities, penances, they may come to the impersonal understanding of Your brahma-jyotir, but patanty adhaḥ, again comes to the material world."

Lecture on BG 4.34 -- New York, August 14, 1966:

And even in that knowledge field also... Of course, transcendental knowledge, as we have discussed already, they are viewed in different, three different angles of vision: the knowledge of Brahmavāda, or impersonal, impersonal Absolute Truth, and the knowledge of Paramātmā, the localized Supersoul, and the knowledge of Bhagavān, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There are different stages of development of knowledge. But the first beginning knowledge is that we must understand that "I am not this body. I am spirit soul, and my aim of life should be how to get out of this material entanglement." That is knowledge. That is the beginning of knowledge.

Lecture on BG 4.39-42 -- Los Angeles, January 14, 1969:

Similarly, the impersonalists, they think that "I am Brahman, but I am not this matter." That is a fact. I am spirit. I am not this matter. But that understanding is not sufficient. What is my position as spirit? Then, when we come to the supreme spirit, the all-spirit, that is perfection of knowledge. So impersonal conception is simply a negation of these material varieties. But above that, there is spiritual variety. And that is real knowledge. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Lecture on BG 4.39-42 -- Los Angeles, January 14, 1969:

If some physician comes and tells to the patient, "Oh, you are so suffering. All right. let me cut your throat so you will not suffer. Everything will be stopped," is that good treatment? (laughs) You have to stop his fever and keep him into his healthy life. That is treatment. Simply stoppage, simply negation, void, that is not treat...

You cannot remain void because you are active. If you are forcibly made into voidness, how long you can remain in voidness? As soon as the so-called voidness is finished, you come to this activity again. So you have to be situated in your real activities. That is required. That real activities is Kṛṣṇa conscious activities. And that is not impersonal. That is personal.

Lecture on BG 4.39-42 -- Los Angeles, January 14, 1969:

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Viṣṇujana: If all that is required is chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, why do we have the pictures and the clothes and the instruments and the altar and Lord Jagannātha?

Prabhupāda: Because we are personalist. We are not impersonal. This is spiritual varieties. You are talking of no varieties. Is it not? You were asking me, "Why there are so many varieties?" This is your plain question.

Guest: Not only that. Why are the heads shaved?

Prabhupāda: That is another variety. So you want variety-less. Is it not?

Guest: No. I am asking why these are necessary. Why are they necessary?

Prabhupāda: They are not necessary for a person who is advanced. But in the preliminary stage we have such necessities. This creates atmosphere, but at the same time, these varieties are not, I mean to say, material varieties. They are spiritual varieties. The place where we are trying to approach, Vaikuṇṭha, there the inhabitants are like this. They have got this tilaka, they have got... Of course, we haven't got four hands, but they have got four hands. There are two hands also. And they are dressed like this. So these things are not material varieties as much as chanting is not material vibration.

Lecture on BG 5.17-25 -- Los Angeles, February 8, 1969:

Yes. The complete knowledge, Absolute Truth, means to understand three features of the Absolute Truth. One feature is Brahman, impersonal. The next feature is Paramātmā, localized. And the next feature is Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. When one understands these three features of the Absolute Truth very perfectly then he is in complete knowledge of the science of God. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said that human life is meant for inquiring the Absolute Truth. And the next verse the Absolute Truth is explained. Vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvam (SB 1.2.11). Those who are in knowledge of the Absolute Truth, they say, "Absolute Truth, that thing which is nondual. Nondual. And that Absolute Truth is known in three phases." What is that? Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. There is no difference between Brahman and Paramātmā or Bhagavān, the same thing.

Lecture on BG 5.22-29 -- New York, August 31, 1966:

Everything we are now doing in the matter of sense gratification, we have to prepare ourself, we have to train ourself for the sense gratification of Kṛṣṇa. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So that requires toleration. Now we are practiced to satisfy our own senses since a very, very long time. In every life, either in this human form of life, in other, so many species of life everyone is engaged for sense gratification. Now we have to change the process. Instead to satisfying my senses, we have to agree to satisfy the senses of Kṛṣṇa. Unfortunately we make the Supreme Lord senseless. "God is impersonal; He has no sense. He has no hands. He has no mouth. He has no legs." Then what it is? So we are creating imaginary God in that way. But here is God present, Kṛṣṇa. He's with hands and legs and feet and speaking to Arjuna. So God is not senseless. If He is senseless, then there was no use of speaking this Bhagavad-gītā and taking it so very important book so that world is reading very carefully. He's not senseless. He is full sense. Otherwise His Bhagavad-gītā has no meaning. So He is full sense. Now, the Kṛṣṇa consciousness means that instead of satisfying my senses, we are to satisfy the sense of Kṛṣṇa. A simple process. It is not very difficult.

Lecture on BG 5.26-29 -- Los Angeles, February 12, 1969:

That is the highest perfection. In the spiritual sky either you remain as a small spark of spirit soul, molecules. Just like there are millions of molecules of shining matter in the sunshine. So if I remain as molecule in the brahma-jyotir, that is also possible. The impersonalist wants that. Or if I enter into some spiritual planet and associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead that is also another spiritual existence. Although both of them are spiritual existence, this spiritual existence is impersonal. To remain as molecular part of the Brahman rays or spiritual rays, that is impersonal. And to have a spiritual form just like Kṛṣṇa and Viṣṇu, that is another spiritual perfection. That is Vaiṣṇava philosophy.

And nirvāṇa, nirvāṇa, the Buddha philosophy is just above the material conditional life but on the margin of spiritual existence. That is... Nirvāṇa means void of material existence. Nirvāṇa, this impersonal conception is also nirvāṇa. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that this impersonal philosophy is another phase of the void philosophy. Veda... Covered void philosophy. Impersonalism is covered void philosophy. They are all the same. Śaṅkara's philosophy of impersonalism and Lord Buddha's philosophy void is almost the same. Real life, real spiritual life is this Vaiṣṇava philosophy. Vaiṣṇava philosophy, to associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead face to face. Just like we are sitting here face to face. We are talking, you are hearing. You can have this perfection. That is personal conception of spiritual perfection.

Lecture on BG 6.1 -- Los Angeles, February 13, 1969:

Yes. There is demand. The impersonalists, they have got one demand, that to become one with the supreme impersonal being. But a devotee has no demand. He simply engages himself to serve Kṛṣṇa for the satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa. They do not want anything in return. That is pure devotion. Just like Lord Caitanya said, na dhanaṁ na janaṁ na sundarīṁ kavitāṁ vā jagadīśa kāmaye: (Cc. Antya 20.29, Śikṣāṣṭaka 4) "I do not want any wealth, I do not want any number of followers, I do not want any nice wife. Simply let me be engaged in Your service." That's all. That is the bhakti-yoga system. When Prahlāda Mahārāja was asked by Lord Nṛsiṁha-deva, "My dear boy, you have suffered for me so much, so whatever you want, you ask for it." So he refused. "My dear master, I am not doing mercantile business with you, that I will take some remuneration from you for my service." This is pure devotion. So yogis or the jñānīs, they are demanding that they should become one with the Supreme. Why one with the Supreme? Because they have got bitter experience by the separation of material pangs. But a devotee has no such thing. The devotee remains, although separate from the Lord, he is fully enjoying in the service of the Lord.

Lecture on BG 6.6-12 -- Los Angeles, February 15, 1969:

Yes, this is very important. Now, Kṛṣṇa, we are accepting Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord. Now how we accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord. Because it is stated in the Vedic literature, just like in the Brahma-saṁhitā, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Imagination, those who are in the modes of passion and ignorance, they are imagining the form of God. And when they are confused, they say, "Oh, there is no personal God. It is all impersonal or void." That is frustration. But actually, God has got form. Why not? The Vedānta-sūtra says, janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) the Supreme Absolute Truth is that from whom or from which everything emanates. Now we have got forms. so we have also must have been, not only we, there are different kinds of forms of the living entities. Wherefrom they come? Wherefrom this form is originated? This is very common sense question. If God is not a person, then how His sons become persons? If your father is not a person, how you can become a person? This is very common question.

Lecture on BG 6.11-21 -- New York, September 7, 1966:

So śāntiṁ nirvāṇa-paramām mat-saṁsthām adhigacchati. And after extinguishing this material life, then what is the next? Next is not void, is not impersonal void, as they say. Bhagavad-gītā does not say like that. Bhagavad-gītā says, mat-saṁsthām adhigacchati. "He enters into My establishment." Saṁsthām means establishment. Now, when you speak of establishment... Suppose a big man, he has got establishment. So that means it is not void. Establishment means there are varieties of engagement. Unless it cannot be saṁsthām. So here it is clearly said that mat-saṁsthām adhigacchati. One attains to the kingdom of God where spiritual varieties are there. They are not variety-less. Otherwise, the Lord would not have said that saṁsthām. There is a regular establishment. Just like you have got a regular establishment in your household affairs, similarly, the Lord has a regular household establishment in the spiritual world. Mat-saṁsthām adhigacchati. If... These processes are simply to qualify himself to enter into that establishment. That's all. We are all belong to that establishment, but being forgetful, we are now in this material world.

Lecture on BG 6.21-27 -- New York, September 9, 1966:

So the conclusion is that that spiritual spark is not impersonal. It is actually personal. The soul is actual person. As God is actual, personal, similarly, because we are part and parcel of the Supreme, therefore, if I am a person, then God must be person. God is the father of everyone. Now, if I am the son—I have got personality; I have got individuality—how can you deny the individuality and personality of the Supreme Lord? So these things require intelligence. Intelligence. Sukham ātyantikaṁ yat tat buddhi-grāhyam atīndriyam (BG 6.21). Atīndriyam. Atīndriyam means you have to transcend these material senses. Then you can actually appreciate what is happiness.

Lecture on BG 6.35-45 -- Los Angeles, February 20, 1969:

Because I sit down for meditation. Of course if meditation is focusing the mind on Viṣṇu, that is very good. But there are so many yoga societies, they educate their student to concentrate their mind on something void, something color. Not exactly to Viṣṇu form. You see. So that is very difficult task. That is also explained in the Bhagavad—kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). One who is trying to concentrate his mind on the imperson or voidness, it is very difficult and troublesome. At least here in this temple, these students, they are trying to concentrate his mind on Kṛṣṇa. But to concentrate one's mind in void, that is very difficult. So naturally my mind is flickering. Instead of finding out something void, my mind is engaged in something else. Because mind must be engaged in something. If it is not engaged in Kṛṣṇa, then it must be engaged in māyā. So if you cannot do that, then this so-called meditation and sitting posture is simply useless waste of time.

Lecture on BG 6.40-42 -- New York, September 16, 1966:

Either any yoga system, any spiritual life is called yoga. Yoga means to link. We are part and parcel of the supreme absolute, Brahman or Bhagavān, whatever you call, Paramātmā, it doesn't matter. But yoga means linking. So the linking, either you link with impersonal formless, the Supreme Brahman, that is also linking. And if you by meditation you link up with the Supersoul within yourself that is also transcendental activity. Or you directly worship as a devotee, Kṛṣṇa. Anything you adopt, that is spiritual life. But to become Kṛṣṇa conscious or a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, that is the ultimate goal. That we have in the Bhagavad-gītā:

bahūnāṁ janmanām ante

jñānavān māṁ prapadyate

vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti

sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ

(BG 7.19)

After two stages. Impersonal conception of the Supreme or localized realization of the Supreme. They have again to come to this consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, after many, many births. So therefore it is better if they're intelligent enough, when you get the information that ultimately you have to come to this point, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti (BG 7.19). Vāsudeva means Kṛṣṇa. Sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ. That sort of great soul is very rare. So why not become a rare great soul immediately and just become in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and make your life successful? Thank you very much. Any questions? Yes?

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- San Francisco, March 17, 1968:

So Kṛṣṇa is everything. The atheist will say, "Oh, they have installed some wooden forms and they are worshiping as gods." Atheistic. And one who knows the Kṛṣṇa science, he'll understand that "Kṛṣṇa is everything; therefore He can appear in everything." If electricity current is everywhere, so wherever you touch current you'll feel, "Here is current." Similarly, the Kṛṣṇa current in impersonal form is everywhere. It is the technician who knows how to use that current. That's all. So... Just like we get telephone connection. We simply inform the person, deposit our money. They come immediately. They find out where the connection can be done and he does his work. We do not know. He knows the technique, how to join telephone wire. Within a few seconds he joins and he, oh, "kling, kling," you are ready.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Los Angeles, December 2, 1968:

Now, here the word yogam is also explained. What sort of yoga Kṛṣṇa is recommending? Mayy āsakta-manāḥ. Keeping the mind always attached to Kṛṣṇa, this yoga system. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness is yoga system. At the present day, they are concentrating their mind on something void, impersonal, according to their own prescription. The real process is to concentrate the mind on something. But that something, if we make it void, it is very difficult to concentrate our mind in that way. That is also explained in the Bhagavad-gītā in the Twelfth Chapter: kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). Those who are trying to meditate on something impersonal and void, their trouble is greater than those who are meditating on the Supreme Person. This is explained. Why? Avyaktā hi gatir duḥkhaṁ dehavadbhir avāpyate. We cannot concentrate our mind (on) something impersonal. If you think of your friend, if you think of your father, mother, or somebody whom you love, you can continue such thinking for hours together. But if you have no objective to fix up your mind, then it is very difficult. But people are being taught to concentrate on something void and impersonal.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Los Angeles, March 12, 1970:

Devotee: Purport: "In the first six chapters of the Bhagavad-gītā, the living entity has been described as nonmaterial spirit soul who is capable of elevating himself to self-realization by different types of yogas. At the end of the Sixth Chapter it has been clearly stated that the steady concentration of the mind upon Kṛṣṇa, or in other words, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, is the highest form of all yoga. By concentrating one's mind upon Kṛṣṇa one is able to know the Absolute Truth completely, but not otherwise. The impersonal brahma-jyotir or localized Paramātmā is not perfect knowledge of the Absolute Truth, because it is partial."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Impersonal... Just like sunshine and the sun disc and the inhabitants of the sun globe. In one sense, they are one unit. You cannot separate sunshine from the sun disc or the sun disc from the inhabitants or the predominating deity of sun planet. They are all in light, but still there is difference. Sunshine is coming within your room. Although the sun disc and the sunshine is not different, still, when you realize what is sunshine, that does not mean you realize what is the sun disc. This is very practical. To understand what is sunshine does not mean to understand what is sun disc. You can have some idea: "The sun disc is also light, and it has got heat. It is illuminating." These ideas you can get, but not exactly what is the temperature of that sun disc, how you can live there. There are so many things to learn. Therefore, impersonal Brahman, understanding of impersonal Brahman, is not perfect knowledge.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Los Angeles, March 12, 1970:

Knowledge of sunshine is not perfect knowledge of sun. That you can understand very easily. Suppose daily you are having sunshine within your room. Does it mean you know what is sun disc or what is the inhabitants of the sun globe? No. Nobody knows. Similarly, impersonal knowledge of the Absolute Truth is like that. That is not complete knowledge. Although it is light, sunshine is also light, sun disc is also light and the inhabitants there, they also must be light. Otherwise, how can they live? They also must be fiery. Because the inhabitants there, they are also fiery, without being fire how you can live in fire? Sun is fire; everyone knows it. The temperature is very high. So one, without having a body suitable to that temperature, how they can live there? But there are living entities. That we have got. Because you cannot live in the water, that does not mean there is no living entity in the water. This is nonsense. So if we similarly conclude, "Because we cannot live in the fire, therefore there is no living entity in the fire," that is nonsense. The exact knowledge is at least to accept this reasoning, that I cannot live in the water, but if you count the number of living entities within the water, oh, it is far more than living entities on the land, because the water is three-fourths of the globe. So how many living entities can live on the one-fourth? Naturally the number of living entities is far greater. But if you conclude, "Oh, I cannot... If I put into the water I shall die, so there is no living entity within the water," this is nonsense. You don't compare with your situation with others.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Los Angeles, March 12, 1970:

So everything... In the Brahma-saṁhitā, we understand, every planet has a different situation, not that everything of this nature. So it is... It is not complete idea. "Because you can know what is sunshine, therefore you can know what is sun-god or sun disc"—no, that can (not) be done. Similarly, because you have some spiritual light, impersonal light... What is that impersonal light? The whole Buddha philosophy, impersonal philosophy, is looking to that impersonal. What is that? That "Because here in this material world I have got bad experience of this personal existence, therefore I conclude that there must be something impersonal. That is nice." That is thinking in the opposite way. But that is not actual fact. Just like a diseased person. Lying in one side, he is getting pain. He thinks, "If I lie down on the other side I will be relieved." That he is thinking, but so long he is diseased, there is no question of relief. He is thinking like that, this way or that way. Just like in the materialistic way they are... Their last point of happiness is sex life. That's all. So they have enjoyed sex life in this way; now they are trying to enjoy sex life in that way. But the enjoyment is the same. There is no more enjoyment. That is finished. You can eschew in so many ways, but the result is the same. Similarly, unless you have got perfect knowledge of the Absolute Truth, if you think of the Absolute Truth as something opposite of your present status, that is not perfect knowledge. The impersonal knowledge is like that, something opposite of this material world. Go on.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Auckland, April 15, 1972:

If you see the photograph of your father, how do you say that is he impersonal, he has no form? How do you conclude? First of all answer me. I have seen form of Kṛṣṇa. You have seen also form of Kṛṣṇa. There are hundreds and thousands of temples in India. Do you think they are all fools? And they were established by big ācāryas, by Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, Lord Caitanya. There is Jagannātha temple. Jagannātha temple, every day hundreds and thousands of people are going to see. In Vṛndāvana there are five thousand temples, Kṛṣṇa. Five thousand, ten thousand people are going. You know. In India there are so many pilgrimages. So do you think all these temples established by our predecessor, they are all fools?

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- San Diego, July 1, 1972:

Prabhupāda: Purport.

Pradyumna: "In the Seventh Chapter of Bhagavad-gītā, the nature of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is fully described. Kṛṣṇa is full in all opulences, and how He manifests such opulences is described herein. Also, four kinds of fortunate people who become attached to Kṛṣṇa and four kinds of unfortunate people who never take to Kṛṣṇa are described in this chapter. In the first six chapters of Bhagavad-gītā, the living entity has been described as nonmaterial spirit soul, which is capable of elevating himself to self-realization by different types of yogas. At the end of the Sixth Chapter, it has been clearly stated that the steady concentration of the mind upon Kṛṣṇa, or in other words, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, is the highest form of all yoga. By concentrating one's mind upon Kṛṣṇa, one is able to know the Absolute Truth completely, but not otherwise. Impersonal brahma-jyotir or localized Paramātmā realization is not perfect knowledge of the Absolute Truth because it is partial. Full and scientific knowledge is Kṛṣṇa, and everything is revealed to the person in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. In complete Kṛṣṇa consciousness one knows that Kṛṣṇa is ultimate knowledge beyond any doubts. Different types of yoga are only stepping-stones on the path of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. One who takes directly to Kṛṣṇa consciousness automatically knows about brahma-jyotir and Paramātmā in full. By practice of Kṛṣṇa consciousness yoga, one can know everything in full, namely the Absolute Truth, the living entities, the material nature and their manifestations with paraphernalia. One should therefore begin yoga practice as directed in the last verse of the Sixth Chapter. Concentration of the mind upon Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme, is made possible by prescribed devotional service in nine different forms, of which..."

Prabhupāda: There are many persons who like meditation. Nowadays, it is very popular, especially in your country. But when we ask them what is the subject of meditation, they cannot say. Can you say what is the subject of meditation? Anyone who is little aware of this meditation? What is that meditation?

Devotee: It's a process of negation.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Ahmedabad, December 13, 1972:

When Śukadeva Gosvāmī described the cowherd boys playing with Kṛṣṇa... So he is remarking that "These boys who are playing with Kṛṣṇa... Who is this Kṛṣṇa?" Itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā. Those, those who are impersonalists, those who are attached to the impersonal brahma-jyotir, for them, He is the target. He is the target. From Him, the brahma-jyotir comes. Itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā. And dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena: "And those who are devotees, for them, here is the Supreme Lord." Dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena. And māyāśritānāṁ nara-dārakeṇa: "And those who are under the influence of māyā, for them, He's ordinary human child." The same person. Different views. One is seeing that the ultimate target of brahma-jyotir, and somebody is seeing that He is the Supreme Lord, and somebody's seeing, "He's ordinary boy." So Kṛṣṇa is visioned under different positions. Under different positions. But He's the Supreme Lord.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Bombay, January 13, 1973:

We want to keep our youthhood by so many ways, but Kṛṣṇa is always young. Bhagavān is always young. Bhagavān never becomes old. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam ādyaṁ purāṇa-puruṣaṁ nava-yauvanaṁ ca (Bs. 5.33). He's the Purāṇa-puruṣam. Purāṇa-puruṣam means the oldest person. Be..., because He's ādyam, beginning of all puruṣas. Puruṣa means the three Puruṣas, Viṣṇu—Mahā-Viṣṇu, Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. They are called Puruṣa. So ādyaṁ puruṣam. He's male, person. He's not imperson. Imperson is only His one bodily feature. So in spite of His being ādyam, ādi-puruṣam, the cause of all causes, cause of Mahā-Viṣṇu, cause of Brahmā, still nava-yauvanaṁ ca, He never becomes old, God never becomes old. That is His opulence. Aiśvaryasya samagrasya vīryasya yaśasaḥ. Yaśasaḥ, I have already explained. He's so famous still. You cannot find in the history of the world, five thousand years ago, who appeared and still famous. You don't find. There is not a single instance within the human history. But Kṛṣṇa, He appeared five thousand years ago, during the Battle of Kurukṣetra, before that, and still He's famous. Not only famous in India, but He's famous all over the world. In each, every language, the "Kṛṣṇa" word is there, dictionary. He's also stated as "Hindu God." But Kṛṣṇa is not Hindu god or Muslim God. He's God. God is neither Hindu nor Muslim nor Christian. God is God. So Kṛṣṇa is Bhagavān. Svayaṁ Bhagavān. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). There are... There may be many Bhagavāns, but Kṛṣṇa is the original Bhagavān.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Sydney, February 16, 1973:

Unfortunately, the impersonalists, they have no idea of the form, form of the Lord. Because they're impersonalist, they do not accept any form of the Lord. But there is the form of the Lord. Form of the Lord, there must be. God is accepted as the supreme father. In Christianity also it is accepted, the supreme father. In every religion He's accepted the supreme person, supreme father, supreme master. So how He can be accepted as imperson? From logical point of view... Just like you are a person, your father is a person, his father is also a person, his father is also a person. Go on, even you do not know your topmost forefather, you know it that he was a person. Similarly, the supreme father, the father of all fathers, how He can be imperson? Logically you cannot conclude. He must be a person. And that is the Vedic version also. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate.

vadanti tat tattva-vidas

tattva yaj jñānam advayam

brahmeti paramātmeti

bhagavān iti śabdyate

(SB 1.2.11)

The Supreme Absolute Truth is one, but He's realized from different angles of vision. Those who are trying to realize the Supreme Absolute Truth by speculation, they come to the impersonal conclusion. And those who are trying to think Him, think about Him within the heart, dhyānāvasthita... That is the yogic, yogic principle, to think of the Supreme within the heart. He is there within the heart. Both the living entity, individual living entity and God, is sitting within this heart. That's a fact.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Sydney, February 16, 1973:

These are the description in the Vedas, that God means that as we are persons, He is the supreme person. That's all. Just like you are also persons, you are also Australians, and the president of the Australian government, he is also a person. He is not imperson. The government may be imperson, but the head of the government is a person. Similarly, in the universal government there are so many living entities, just like we are. Not only human beings—8,400,000 species of life, all living entities. God is also living entity, but He is the supreme living entity. That is the difference. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). So as we act under the leadership of a supreme person, similarly, if we act, if we live under the leadership of God, that is our perfection of life. This is called yogaṁ yuñjan mad-āśrayaḥ. Mad-āśrayaḥ means "under My direction." What is the direction of God? Just become His devotee, just think of Himself, always about Him, just offer Him obeisances. This is the process. It is not very difficult. And if you cannot do anything, simply if you chant the holy name of God. We do not say that you chant the name of Kṛṣṇa. If you have got any name, holy name of God, you can chant that also. But chant. This is the process recommended in this age.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Hong Kong, January 25, 1975:

So this misconception of life, that "I am God," "There is no God..." Atheists and voidists, they say like that. The voidists, they say śūnyavādi. They say, "There is no God." And the impersonalists, they say that there is God, but there is no head, there is no leg, there is no hand, there is no mouth, there is no, no, no... Ultimately, what is their God? If God has no head, no leg, no body, no mouth, then what is that God? That is also another way of explaining God as zero. The voidists, they directly say, "There is no God. We don't believe in God." That is understandable. But this impersonal explanation of God, that is not understandable. What is this? "God has no leg, neither God has no head, God has no hand, God has no mouth." Then what is that God? They cannot say.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- London, March 9, 1975:

So these are the processes. So Kṛṣṇa is saying, summarized. They are explained by the mad-āśrayaḥ, those who are devotees. So in this way we have to increase our attachment for Kṛṣṇa. And when we increase our attachment for Kṛṣṇa, then Kṛṣṇa says, asaṁśayaṁ samagraṁ māṁ yathā jñāsyasi tac chṛṇu (BG 7.1). Now everyone has got some doubt, whether there is God or not, whether God is person or imperson, whether He is something... He has no idea. In any religion you take, ask him, "What do you know about God?" That he cannot explain. Because he is not in the platform, how he can be understand God? That is not possible. It is not... But we are confident what is God, what is His father's name, what is His name, what is His address, everything. No saṁśaya, no doubt. Everything complete. Asaṁśayam. We are confident that we are going to Kṛṣṇa, back to home, back to Godhead. There is no doubt, asaṁśayam and samagram. Sama means full. What is God meant? Asaṁśayam... (end)

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Nairobi, October 27, 1975:

If you do that, then you are a good citizen. And if you don't know what is government, if you do not know what government desires, expects from you, then what is the meaning of your good citizenship? There is no meaning. Similarly, to become religious without any clear understanding of God is bogus, is cheating. That is cheating. That is not religion. Therefore Kṛṣṇa said that "If you want to know Me," asaṁśayam, "without any doubt..." God may be personal, impersonal, or this, that, but you must know it perfectly well. Don't say, "Perhaps it may be like this. Perhaps may be like this..." That is imperfect knowledge. That is no knowledge. So therefore Kṛṣṇa personally says, mayy āsakta-manāḥ pārtha yogaṁ yuñjan. This is a yogi. This is the first-class yogi. Kṛṣṇa has explained that yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gatenāntar-ātmanā śraddhāvān bhajate yo māṁ sa me yukta... (BG 6.47). So śraddhāvān bhajate yo mām, one who is worshiping Kṛṣṇa with śraddhā, with faith, complete faith, bhajate, and serving Him, so who is that person? A devotee. Without being a devotee, how with faith and adherence and reverence and obedience you can serve Kṛṣṇa unless you love Kṛṣṇa?

Lecture on BG 7.1-3 -- Ahmedabad, December 14, 1972:

So avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇaṁ pūtaṁ hari-kathāmṛtam, śravaṇaṁ naiva kartavyam. And it is forbidden, "Don't hear." Why? Hari-kathāmṛta, kṛṣṇa-kathā, the message of God, the words of God, Bhagavad-gītā? He may be anything, but the kathā is the same; so what is the harm to hear from an avaiṣṇava? Sanātana Gosvāmī gives the example: sarpocchiṣṭaṁ payo yathā. Sarpocchiṣṭaṁ payo yathā. 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. This is so much condemned.

Lecture on BG 7.1-3 -- Paris, June 13, 1974:

So yogaṁ yuñjan mad-āśrayaḥ. This yoga system should be practiced, the mad-āśraya... Mad-āśraya means "under My direct supervision." This yoga system means it is not impersonal—personal. And therefore the word is used, bhagavān uvāca: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead said." Bhagavān, the Absolute Truth, He's a person. Sometimes we think... There are many, they think the Absolute Truth is impersonal. But the Absolute Truth is person. Impersonal realization of the Absolute Truth is partial. It is not complete realization. Therefore it is mentioned here, asaṁśayam, "without any doubt" and samagram, "in full." After all, yoga system means an endeavor to understand the Absolute Truth. Yoga means linking, connecting.

Lecture on BG 7.3 -- Bombay, March 29, 1971:

So ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ (CC Madhya 17.136). If we simply speculate, our senses, it is not possible to understand. But if we take to this process, sevonmukhe hi jihvādau... Jihvā, this tongue, can be engaged in two processes. You can glorify Lord Kṛṣṇa. Simply glorify Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is so great, Kṛṣṇa is so kind, Kṛṣṇa is so beautiful, Kṛṣṇa is so opulent, Kṛṣṇa is so powerful. Why you make Kṛṣṇa as imperson? He has got so many qualities, transcendental qualities. What would you gain simply by saying that Kṛṣṇa is nirākāra, finish all business? No. Try to understand Kṛṣṇa, how much powerful He is, how much strong He is, how beautiful he is, how learned, wise He is, and hear from Him. The śāstras are there. Why you stop your business of Kṛṣṇa consciousness simply by saying that Kṛṣṇa is nirākāra? Kṛṣṇa is not nirākāra. How He can be nirākāra? Sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Vigraha means He has got transcendental form. If He hasn't got transcendental form, how these great ācāryas are worshiping Him—Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Lord Caitanya, and all the great ācāryas? Does it mean they are making a farce?

Lecture on BG 7.3 -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1973:

Spirit is not matter. That is also described. Nainaṁ chindanti śastrāṇi. It is not that, that as we have got experience, that we can cut into pieces one material thing. Spirit cannot be cut into pieces. The part and parcel of the spirit, it is not that at a certain time we have become cut or separated from the Supreme. No. We are individual soul eternally, sanātana. Sanātana. That is our position. So therefore those who are thinking that by merging into the existence of Brahman, they will become one, that is not possible. Not one. They'll remain individual, but the whole atmosphere is spiritual. That's all. But it is impersonal spiritual. There is only existence, sac-cid-ānanda. But there is no ānanda. But every spiritual identity, every spiritual soul, as well as the supreme spirit, they are ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). Ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhiḥ (Bs. 5.37). Everyone, as Kṛṣṇa enjoys, similarly we, being part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, we also want to enjoy. But we can enjoy in combination with Kṛṣṇa. Just like our parts and parcel of the body, the finger, the leg, the toes, the eyes and ears, they cannot enjoy separately. When the enjoyable things or the foodstuff is given to the stomach, every part enjoys. Similarly, we being part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, we can enjoy life in cooperation with Kṛṣṇa, not separately.

Lecture on BG 7.3 -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1973:

Similarly, to merge into the Brahman is not siddhi. That is the verdict of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Actually, it is a fact. Bhāgavata, whatever it says, that is real fact. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. If one thinks that "Now I am merged in the brahma-jyotir, so I am now vimukta. I am now mukta. I am now liberated," so that Bhāgavata says, "He is thinking like that, he's liberated. He is not liberated." Vimukta-mānina. Just like if I think am millionaire, does it mean I have become millionaire. I am not millionaire. Vimukta-mānina. Why? Tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Because these persons who are thinking that he has become liberated, their buddhi is not yet cleansed. Aviśuddha. Śuddhāśuddha. Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ, vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvāt. Asta-bhāvāt. No information of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He is thinking that the Absolute is imperson. Therefore, asta-bhāvāt, he has no information of the Supreme Person.

Lecture on BG 7.3 -- Bombay, February 18, 1974:

Therefore Kṛṣṇa said in the beginning of this chapter that jñānaṁ me. Jñānaṁ te 'haṁ sa-vijñānam (BG 7.2). It is a great science. It is not a speculative; it is not imagination. Just like sometimes they create imagined God. The impersonalists, they think there is no God. "God is not personal, but is impersonal. So you can imagine any form." That is rascaldom. That is not Kṛṣṇa; that is not God. How, with your limited senses, imperfect senses, you can imagine God? Whatever you imagine, that is rascaldom, that is not Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu kaścid vetti māṁ tattvataḥ (BG 7.3). If you want to know Kṛṣṇa, then you must become Kṛṣṇa's devotee. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti (BG 18.55). You cannot understand by your so-called scholarship, imaginative power. That is not possible. Athāpi te deva padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda-leśānugṛhīta eva hi, jānāti tattvam (SB 10.14.29). Again that tattvam. "One who has achieved a little favor of You, he can understand you by tattvata, in truth." Athāpi te deva padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda, padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda-leśānugṛhīta eva hi, jānāti tattvam, na cānya, na ca anya, ciram, for good, for many, many millions of years, vicinvan, simply by speculating. That is not possible. There are many places like that.

Lecture on BG 7.4-5 -- Bombay, March 30, 1971:

Now, Kṛṣṇa says, bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ (BG 7.4). When we cannot accommodate that how from a person all these material manifestation, the gigantic sky, the innumerable planets with different varieties of energies, how it is possible that it is produced from a person... Therefore, those who are in poor fund of knowledge, they think just the opposite way. Because personally, how it is possible? Therefore they think of the Supreme Absolute Truth as imperson, but that is not fact. Person. We can again study. Just like your body, my body, although it is gigantic... Just like elephant's body... Or there are many other animals. Just in the ocean there are many big fishes. One fish is called timi, the whale fish. It is sometimes as big as one big house. And it is understood from the śāstras that there is another fish which is called timiṅgila. Timiṅgila means a big fish which can swallow up a whale as big as a house. So there are so many big animals and big living entities all over the universe, but all of them are production of a very little spiritual spark.

Lecture on BG 7.5 -- Nairobi, November 1, 1975:

This is called acintya-bhedābheda philosophy, simultaneously one and different. As part of the body, the anus or the genital, it is part of the body, and the brain is also part of the body. Both of them are part of the body, but still, brain is superior than the anus and genital. So in this way, and upon this philosophy... It is called acintya-bhedābheda. Bheda means distinct, and abheda means one. We should not take one part of the philosophy, that "Everything is one." No. Everything is one, that is a fact, and still, they are different. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā in the Thirteenth Chapter. Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā: "In My impersonal form I am all-pervading," jagad avyakta, "but," mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni (BG 9.4), "everything is maintained by Me," mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni nāhaṁ teṣu avasthitaḥ, "but I am not there." Just like the jail department is also part of the government, but the president does not live in the jail. Mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni. If the president says that "The jail department is also my department," that does not mean that president has to live in the jail. It is a gross example. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa, God, is everywhere. Not everywhere; His energy is acting everywhere.

Lecture on BG 7.7 -- Vrndavana, August 13, 1974:

So any way you take what Kṛṣṇa says, mayi sarvam idaṁ protam, "Everything resting on Me..." Similarly, in the Ninth Chapter Kṛṣṇa said, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā. The energies are avyakta. Energy. Just like there is light, but it is impersonal, but the lamp is personal, or localized, similarly, Kṛṣṇa's energies... Or take another example. The sunshine is impersonal, but the sun is personal. Sun is not imperson. Wherefrom the sunshine is coming? It is coming from the sun globe. And within the sun globe there is the sun-god. His name is there also—Vivasvān. Name means person. As the sun is person and we worship the sun, Savitā... Oṁ bhūr bhuvaḥ svaḥ tat savitur vareṇyam... So this is the worship of the sun-god, the morning sunrise. So the sun-god is also person.

Lecture on BG 7.8 -- Bombay, February 23, 1974:

This is all-pervasive nature of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. We should mark the important word in this verse: aham. Aham means the person. Kṛṣṇa never says that "I am imperson." Imperson is the feature of Kṛṣṇa. Just like in the Ninth Chapter, Kṛṣṇa says, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4). Mayā, "I am all-pervasive by My energy."

We have already explained that Kṛṣṇa has multi-energies. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). That is the Vedic version, that the Absolute Truth, Supreme Person, has got multi-energies. In the Viṣṇu Purāṇa also: whatever we are experiencing, that is simply Kṛṣṇa's energy. Just like we can experience the heat and light from the sun. We can understand the constitution of the sun globe. Although we are ninety-three million miles, away from the sun, but by his energy, heat and light, we can understand what is the sun. Similarly, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, He has got multi-energies. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate.

Lecture on BG 7.11-13 -- Bombay, April 5, 1971:

They are all emanations from Kṛṣṇa. Because everything is emanation. Kṛṣṇa, or Absolute Truth, means the original source of all emanations. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Athāto brahma jijñāsā. What is Brahman? Brahman means the original source of all emanations, wherefrom everything is coming. So all these varieties, they are coming from Brahman. So Brahman cannot be impersonal. If Brahman is impersonal, how the varieties are coming from Him? That is not possible. Every... He is the source of everything. There is sāttvika-bhāva, there is rājasika-bhāva, there is tāmasika-bhāva in Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, when we see Kṛṣṇa's pastimes, līlā, just like Kṛṣṇa killing a demon, that is rājasika-bhāva. There are many instances. If you read Kṛṣṇa's life from Kṛṣṇa book, you will find exactly it is similar to human activities. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, matta eveti tān viddhi: "But I am not affected by those qualities." That is Kṛṣṇa's special prerogative. When we are under the spell of sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa, or tamo-guṇa, we become affected. But Kṛṣṇa, when you find that rajo-guṇa is exhibited in His pastimes, but He is not under the influence of that rajo-guṇa. Even sometimes Kṛṣṇa is found under the influence of tamo-guṇa, but He is not there.

Lecture on BG 7.11-16 -- New York, October 7, 1966:

So now these two class and another class, jijñāsu. Jijñāsu means inquisitive. Just like an intelligent boy is very much inquisitive to understand. He asks always his parents, "Oh, mommy, what is this? What is this? What is this?" So mother explains. Similarly, one who is intelligent... These boys, these children who inquire, they are very intelligent boys. They will come out very intelligent in future. These are the signs of intelligence, the inquiring boy. So similarly, there are persons who are very inquisitive. They are studying. Just like the scientists, they are making research. Similarly, when one makes research what is God, what is God... Now, scientifically, with great intellect, one tries to understand what is God, oh, he is also good. He is also good. He is making proper research. Yes. Then the distressed and the person in want and the inquisitive and jñānī. Jñānī means who has understood his spiritual constitutional position. He is called jñānī, man in knowledge. He also inquires, he also becomes, he also goes to God. Maybe personal, impersonal conception, but he is trying to take shelter of the ultimate truth, Absolute Truth.

Lecture on BG 7.15-18 -- New York, October 9, 1966:

Then, therefore, Kṛṣṇa says, teṣāṁ jñānī nitya-yuktaḥ. Jñānī is nitya-yukta. Jñānī is not a... He is not a jñānī, or man in knowledge, who is not eternally engaged in the service of Kṛṣṇa. There are... There is a class of jñānī, impersonalists. They say that "Because to worship impersonal is very difficult for us, so imagine some form of God." They are not jñānīs; they are fools. Oh, you cannot imagine the form of God. God is so great. That may be your imagination, but that is not the form of God. That is concoction. They are called iconographer, iconographer. There are two classes of men: iconoclast and iconographer. Those who imagine the form of God, they are not jñānī, they are iconographer. And those who think that "I have killed God" or "I have finished God," they are iconoclast. Just like in India we have experienced during British days. There were Hindu-Muslim riots. So the Hindus would go to the mosque of the Muslim and break it, and the Muslim would go the temples of the Hindus and break the idol. And they'll think that "We have finished Hindu's God." Just like Hindus also think, "Oh, we have broken their mosque. Therefore I have broken their God." These are foolishness. In another case... I have got experience. When there was, I mean to say, noncooperation movement of Gandhi's, the people became riotous, and they began to break anything government, especially the post boxes on the street. They thought by breaking the post boxes they are finishing the post office.

Lecture on BG 8.5 -- New York, October 26, 1966:

So according to the description, these pictures are drawn. It is not imagination. So this form is factual. It is not imagination. The Māyāvāda philosophers, impersonalists, they answer the Bhagavad-gītā's word that kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām... (BG 12.5). One who is attached to impersonal views, their process of meditation or execution of spiritual activities is very troublesome. Now, therefore Māyāvāda philosopher, they say that "God has no form. But because you cannot meditate upon the formless, so you just imagine any form you like." So God is not subjected to your imagination. That is not God's form. If we imagine something... And that has been degraded. Śaṅkarācārya limited such imaginative forms to five only. Five. What is that five? Viṣṇu, Lord Śiva, and Sun, and Gaṇeśa, and Devī, Durgā. He limited, that "Any of these five forms you can meditate upon, you worship. And ultimately, it is formless." But at the present moment, unauthorized person has degraded in such a way that "You can imagine any form. You can imagine even stool." They say like that. You see.

Lecture on BG 8.12-13 -- New York, November 15, 1966:

But those who are not personalists, they cannot enter into the spiritual planet. They remain outside. Just like the sunshine and the sun disc. The sunshine is not different from the sunshine, sun disc, but still, the sunshine is not the sun disc. Similarly, those who are transferred in the spiritual world, they remain in the effulgence of the Supreme Lord, which is called brahma-jyotir. Brahmajyoti. So those who are not personalists, they are placed in that, into that brahma-jyotir as one of the minute particles. We are minute particles, spiritual spark, and brahma-jyotir is full of spiritual spark. So you become one of the spiritual spark. That is, means you merge into the spiritual existence. Although you keep your individuality constitutionally, but because you don't want any personal form, therefore you are held there, held there in the impersonal brahma-jyotir. Just like the sunshine are small molecules, shining molecules—those who are scientists, they know that—similarly, we are also small, molecular, atomic, less than atom, one ten-thousandth portion of the tip of the hair. Our position is. So that small part remains with the brahma-jyotir as if mixed up, homogeneous, although...

Lecture on BG 8.12-13 -- New York, November 15, 1966:

So difficulty is as living entity, we want enjoyment. Because I am not only simply existence. I have got bliss. Sac-cid-ānanda. I am, I am composed of three spiritual existence. I am eternal, and I am full of knowledge, and I am full of bliss. So those who enter into that impersonal effulgence of the Supreme Lord, they can remain eternally and with full knowledge that "I am now mixed up. I am now homogeneous with the Brahman. Bas." But they cannot have that eternal bliss because that part is wanting. So the difficulty is that when he feels... Just like you, if you are confined in a room alone, you may go on, you may engage yourself in reading some particular book or in some particular thought, but still, you cannot remain alone for all the years and all the time. That is not possible. You'll find some association. You'll find some association, recreation. That is our nature. So similarly, if we merge into the impersonal effulgence of the Supreme Lord, then there is chance of falling down again in this material world. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

Lecture on BG 8.12-13 -- New York, November 15, 1966:

Just like this sputnik man, the aeronautics, they go higher and higher, twenty-five thousand or thirty thousand or hundred thousand miles away. But if they cannot take rest in some planet, they'll fall down, at once fall down again. So the rest is required. In the impersonal form the rest is uncertain, uncertain. Therefore in the Bhāgavata says that āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ (SB 10.2.32). Even after so much endeavor, if he gets into the spiritual world and remains in that impersonal form, the risk is that patanty adhaḥ: he comes down again into this material world. Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ, because he has neglected to serve in love and devotion the Supreme Lord.

Lecture on BG 8.12-13 -- New York, November 15, 1966:

In this... So, so long we are here, we have to practice to love Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Lord. Then we can enter. This is the training. And if we are not trained up in that way, then, by impersonal endeavor, we can enter into the spiritual kingdom, but there is risk of falling down again. Because that alone, that loneliness, will create some disturbance, and he will try to have association. And because he has no association of the Supreme Lord, he will have to come back into this material world and associate with this material association. So better that we should know the nature of our constitutional position. Our constitutional position is that we want eternity, we want complete knowledge and we want pleasure also, pleasure. So if you are kept alone, you cannot have pleasure. Then you'll feel uncomfortable. And for want of pleasure, you'll accept any kind of pleasure: "All right, material pleasure." That's all. That is the risk.

Lecture on BG 8.14-15 -- New York, November 16, 1966:

It is said that "Persons who are interested of becoming liberated," ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ, "simply by the concept of impersonal merging into the spiritual existence," so ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa, "they consider themselves that they are liberated." That is also point of liberation, but the Bhāgavata says that "Although they consider themself as liberated, the aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ..." Aviśuddha means their knowledge is not very pure, not yet pure. Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. The result is āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "They can rise up to the Supreme Absolute platform by their penances and austerities, meditation." That is right. They can reach to that platform. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa means "raising themselves, elevating themselves by severe penances to that platform," āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padam (SB 10.2.32), the Supreme Absolute platform. But patanty adhaḥ: "They again fall down in this material world." Why? Anādṛta: "Because they have not taken seriously about Your personal feature." Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ: "Without worshiping Your lotus feet, the result is that they come down again in this material world."

Lecture on BG 8.14-15 -- New York, November 16, 1966:

So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness was given by Lord Caitanya. Therefore He's, I mean to say, recommended... He's called that namo mahā-vadānyāya: "Oh, You are the most powerful, charitable personality. Nobody has given such a thing—Kṛṣṇa." Because we are all in want of Kṛṣṇa. So that is the process given by Kṛṣṇa Himself. And here Kṛṣṇa says that "I am..." Tasyāhaṁ sulabhaḥ pārtha: "I am... I become very cheap to him." Whom? "One who is constantly engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness." And if you remain twenty-four hours in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then—just like the impersonalists, the yogis, the jñānīs, they transfer themselves to the spiritual world in the..., and merge into the impersonal effulgence—you enter into the planet where Kṛṣṇa is. Then what is the benefit? You can ask, "Well, suppose I do this and enter into the Kṛṣṇa planet, then what is the benefit?"

Lecture on BG 8.20-22 -- New York, November 18, 1966:

Just like you see here millions of planets or stars within this universe. This universe is a small particle only. There are many universes like this. And in the spiritual sky there are three... This is only one-fourth manifestation of the planets. There are other. Three-fourth is there in the spiritual sky. That information is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. Ekāṁśena sthito jagat (BG 10.42). So each and every spiritual planet, there is expansion of Kṛṣṇa, and they are differently named. In that picture we will find, our Bhāgavata. Innumerable. So puruṣa. They are all puruṣa. Puruṣa means the person. They are not imperson. Puruṣa. Puruṣaḥ sa paraḥ. But superior. Puruṣaḥ sa paraḥ pārtha bhaktyā labhyaḥ. You can approach that puruṣa simply by devotional service, not by challenge, not by philosophical speculation or not by exercise of this yoga and that yoga. No. Simply by surrender and devotional service. It is clearly stated. It is not stated that you can reach there by philosophical speculation, mental concoction or by some physical exercise. This is not possible. You have to reach there bhaktyā, by devotion, ananyayā, ananya-cetāḥ, without deviation to this karma, fruitive activities, or the philosophical speculation or this exercise. No. Simply, simply this devotional service, unalloyed devotional service without any mixture. If you can adopt that, then...

Lecture on BG 8.21-22 -- New York, November 19, 1966:

And where you shall do, what you shall do there? Some philosophers think that that spiritual atmosphere must be impersonal, impersonal, void. There are some philosophers, they think like that, that "There is. We accept the spiritual atmosphere." The impersonalists, Śaṅkarites, even the Buddhists, they also, some way or other, they accept that there is the voidness. But the Bhagavad-gītā does not disappoint you in that way. That voidness philosophy has created atheism. Because, just try to understand clearly, I am spiritual being. I want enjoyment. That is my life. I want enjoyment. But as soon as my future is void, I must be inclined to enjoy this material life. Therefore they simply discuss this voidness impersonalism, but they enjoy as much as possible this material life. Simply armchair philosophical discussion. But as soon as we see their behavior, they're too much attached with the material enjoyment. So that is simply you can enjoy some speculation. That's all. But there is no benefit. But really if one has any spiritual sense, he'll at once cease from all this nonsense enjoyment. That is the symptom of any idea of spirituality. Bhaktiḥ pareśānubhavo viraktir anyatra syāt (SB 11.2.42). The test is... If you have developed your Kṛṣṇa consciousness, if you have developed your devotional spirit, spiritual realization, the result will be that you'll be at once detached from these all kinds of material enjoyment. How it is? The example is given that just like a hungry man, if he's given nice foodstuff, and as soon as he eats and feels satisfaction, he says, "No, I don't want anymore. I am satisfied." Svāmin kṛtārtho 'smi varaṁ na yāce (CC Madhya 22.42). This is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. You'll find.

Lecture on BG 9.2 -- Calcutta, March 8, 1972:

Then Kṛṣṇa says, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4). Avyakta-mūrtinā: the impersonalist. We understand Kṛṣṇa is person. And what is imperson? Imperson is the expansions of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Just like we can understand by this example, that the sun is person, localized. It is a globe. And within the sun there is sun-god. The sun-god is a person. His name is Vivasvān. That is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā: imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). So Kṛṣṇa spoke this Bhagavad-gītā first to sun-god. So when asked, Kṛṣṇa spoke in this word to Arjuna. Arjuna is a person, and Kṛṣṇa is also person, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). Similarly, Kṛṣṇa spoke to sun-god; he is also a person, but that person should go... I may say, sun-god, his bodily rays is the sunshine, and in the sunshine the whole material world exists. Similarly, there is real sunshine, which is called brahma-jyotir, that is coming out of the body of Kṛṣṇa. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). So this impersonal brahma, sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma, that is Kṛṣṇa's personal rays. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says here, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. Sarvam. Idaṁ sarvam. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Because it is Kṛṣṇa's bodily rays, therefore in that sense you can take anything as brahma, sarva khalv idam, because nothing is different from Kṛṣṇa. Idaṁ hi viśvaṁ bhagavān ivetaro. The whole creation is also bhagavān, but it is as appears as different. It appears as different.

Lecture on BG 9.2 -- Calcutta, March 8, 1972:

On the sunshine all these material planets are resting. Similarly, everything, these universes are resting on Kṛṣṇa's bodily shine, brahma-jyotir. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). Mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni na cāhaṁ teṣv avasthitaḥ. These māyāvādī philosophers say, "Because everything is Kṛṣṇa, then why shall I go to temple? Why shall I say 'Worship Kṛṣṇa'?" But everything is Kṛṣṇa, why not this Kṛṣṇa? This is also Kṛṣṇa. But their poor brain cannot understand. They simply preach impersonalism. But here it is described, what is impersonalism. Impersonalism means expansion of Kṛṣṇa's energy. That is impersonal. That is also Kṛṣṇa, but indirect. Everything is there, mat-sthāni sarva..., but you cannot find out Kṛṣṇa there. So this material world is also expansion of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Bhūmir āpo 'nalo vayuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca bhinnā me prakṛtir aṣṭadhā (BG 7.4). "They are also My energy, but they're separated." So although separated, because it is coming from Kṛṣṇa, it is also Kṛṣṇa. Because everything coming out of gold, that is also gold. So in higher sense, practically there is no... (end)

Lecture on BG 9.2-5 -- New York, November 23, 1966:

Anything done by me, it is done by me. But that, when I finish the work... Suppose I start a business, very nice business, very profitable business, big factory. And if I say that "This factory is started and is conducted by me," does it mean that I am lost? Does it mean I am lost? No. I am there. But it is done by my energy. This big factory... Just like the Ford factory I have seen in your country, a very big factory. There are so many big factories. If the proprietor says, "It is done by me," that "done by me," that person is exist, although the factory is also exist. It does not meant that because he has finished, because he has started that factory, big factory, he's finished, his existence is not there. Similarly, if we say... Kṛṣṇa says that "This, whatever this world, you see, it is done by Me." Does it mean that He becomes no more? This is very simple thing. Why God should be imperson? Just take the same example. If some very good businessman says, "It is done by me," it is to be understood that by his brain, by his energy, by his capital, by his intelligence, he has done all these things. But he remains. It is very simple truth.

Lecture on BG 9.4 -- Calcutta, March 9, 1972:

This verse, we have been discussing last night, this is distinct explanation of impersonalism and personalism. Actually, there cannot be any impersonal idea. Here, Kṛṣṇa says avyakta-mūrtinā. Even avyakta, nonmanifested, it has also a mūrti, a form. Generally we conceive impersonalism, voidism, voidism, compared with the sky. Sky is called zero, void, but sky has also a form. We see daily, a big round form. So there cannot be anything without form. That is not possible. Therefore Kṛṣṇa particularly says avyakta-mūrtinā. Although it is nonmanifested, but it has got a form. But one who does not take to the real form and takes to the imaginary form, that has been explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, kleśaḥ adhika-taras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām. Those who are attached to the impersonal form, they unnecessarily take some trouble, kleśaḥ adhika-taraḥ.

Lecture on BG 9.4 -- Melbourne, April 23, 1976:

These are the description in the Vedic literature. So we have to learn. You cannot by your tiny effort with limited power, limited sense, I mean to say, perception, you cannot speculate. You have to understand from authoritative statements. That is called Veda. Vedas means knowledge which is perfect knowledge and if you study Vedas, then you get perfect knowledge of everything. And the cream of the Vedic knowledge is here in the Bhagavad-gītā. So if you read Bhagavad-gītā carefully, then you get all the knowledge very perfectly. Here it is said, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā. And that expansion, that impersonal expansion, avyakta, not manifested... You cannot see God in person in this expansion. Therefore sometimes we foolishly say that "Can you show me God?" God is there. You have to make your eyes to see. Just like God is here in the temple but somebody is thinking that "This is not God. This is a statue or an idol. They are worshiping idol." Supposing it is idol, but if God is everywhere, why He is not in the idol? What is the argument? If God is everywhere, then why He is not idol? God has the power. And actually this is not idol. This is God's energy. The same example: The sunshine is everywhere, so originally sunshine is the cause of everything.

Lecture on BG 9.4-7 -- New York, November 24, 1966:

Just like electric power is transmitted everywhere. There is wiring. Now, if some electrician is there he can take electric power from anywhere and utilize the electricity. Similarly, His energy is spread all over the universe. When we are transcendentally situated, just like when we become the electrician, then from anywhere we can see God eye to eye. Premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena (Bs. 5.38). That creation, spiritualization of the senses, is possible by devotional service and love. Premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena santaḥ sadaiva hṛdayeṣu vilokayanti (Bs. 5.38). Therefore, as the Lord says, that mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam jagad avyakta-mūrtinā, the Lord is all-pervading all over the universe. Therefore He is within the stone, He is within the earth, He is within the water, He is within the air—everywhere. Therefore, if we make an image of God from anything, either of water, either of stone, either of anything, oh, that is not doll. That is also God. If we have got sufficient devotion, that image also will speak with me, because God is everywhere. Mayā tatam idam sarvam: "I am spread all over, impersonal." But if we make His personal form from anything, either from the stone or from earth or from wood or from anything, or if we create an image of God within myself... There are eight kinds of images recommended in the śāstra, in the Vedic literatures. So any kind of images can be worshiped because God is everywhere.

Lecture on BG 9.11 -- Calcutta, June 30, 1973:

In another place Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat: (BG 7.7) "There is no more superior personality than Me." This is... These are the facts. In the Brahma-saṁhitā it is said, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ: (Bs. 5.1) "Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead." You can become God, I can become God, He can become God, but Supreme God is Kṛṣṇa. If we accept that we are all gods... But still, there is distinction. Here is male god, here is female god, here is child god, here is an educated god, here is a foolish god. If we are all gods, then we have to qualify these gods in this way. There are differentiations from one god to another. That means one god is superior than another god. That you have to accept. So in this way, if you go on making progress, who is the best God, then you come to Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ. So the param, paraṁ brahma, impersonal they say. No. Vigraha, person, just like you and me, person. But they cannot imagine how a person can become so powerful, as in the previous verse it is said, mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram (BG 9.10). A person is directing.

Lecture on BG 9.15-18 -- New York, December 2, 1966:

There are five stages of evolution: śakta, then gāṇapatya, then saura, then śaiva, then vaiṣṇava. In this way, there are five stages. So the impersonalists, they worship in five ways, pañcopāsanā. They are called pañcopāsanā. So one, when he comes to the Viṣṇu stage, he comes to the real stage. But impersonal Viṣṇu, all-pervading Viṣṇu, but when he come to the personal Viṣṇu, then that is perfection of worship. So, so any kind of worship, the Lord accepts, in this way. But that acceptance and devotional acceptance is different. If you are worshiping materialism, that's all right. You get material benefit. Actually you are getting. You are getting. But that is not spiritual. Ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham (BG 4.11). One who worships the Supreme Lord materially, he gets material benefit. And one who worships spiritually, he gets spiritual benefit. But you cannot expect spiritual benefit by material worship. That is not possible. Everything accepted as the worship of the Supreme, but they have got different result also.

Lecture on BG 9.24-26 -- New York, December 12, 1966:

Now, the argument that "In whatever form you worship the Supreme..." This is the Māyāvādī theory, that "God is impersonal. Now, because we cannot worship or meditate on something impersonal, therefore let us imagine something about Him and meditate upon that." Just like the impersonalist yogis. They put before them a lump of something and concentrate upon them. So here that theory is refuted by Kṛṣṇa. That impersonal conception of the Supreme and our imagination of God, that is not the way of approaching God. He says clearly herewith that yānti deva-vratā devān: "Those who are worshiping the demigods..."

Lecture on BG 9.34 -- New York, December 26, 1966, 'Who is Crazy?':

What is that? Somebody's trying to realize his self. I am not this body. He understands that I am not this body. I am spirit soul. Then? If you are spirit soul, then what is your position? Oh, void. Impersonal. Spirit soul, that means voidness? Oh, there is nothing after finishing this body? This voidness? There are philosophers who preach voidness. After this, finishing this body, there is nothing. And other philosophers, impersonalists, they say that, as soon as this body is finished, my personal identity is finished. Do you think like that? Is it possible? So long I am in this body, this body is not actual I am.

Lecture on BG 10.2-3 -- New York, January 1, 1967:

So He's also... According to this version, He's also origin of Paramātmā, the Supersoul. And He is also the origin of nirviśeṣa or impersonal brahma-jyotir. Because it is said, aham ādir hi devānāṁ maharṣīṇāṁ ca sarvaśaḥ (BG 10.2). Sarvaśaḥ means, "Anything that you have any conception of, of all them, I am the supreme source."

Therefore, as it is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Absolute Truth is realized in three phases, vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam (SB 1.2.11). Advayam means nonduality, one. The one supreme truth, Absolute Truth, is realized in three phases, brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate: realization of the impersonal Brahman, or the glowing effulgence, just like sunshine, then the localized Supersoul, then Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Lecture on BG 10.8 -- New York, January 6, 1967:

How can you avoid person? When you love, how can you avoid a person? What do you mean by love? Whenever you love universally... In the universe there are so many men, animals, and plants, and beasts, and birds, and so many things. So we have to love everyone. That is universal. You cannot discriminate, "Oh, this is not universal. This is universal." Universal means all-including. So how you can avoid this person or imperson? You have to love everyone. That is universal.

Lecture on BG 13.5 -- Paris, August 13, 1973:

So about the soul and Supersoul, ṛṣibhiḥ, great sages, saintly persons, they have also discussed. Just like in the present age also, we are different parties, the impersonalist and the personalist. Śaṅkara-sampradāya, they ascertain the Absolute Truth as impersonal, nirviśeṣa, and the Buddhists, they ascertain, "The Absolute Truth is zero."

We are struggling—nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi. We are struggling against these nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi, voidists and impersonalists. So it is not now new. From time immemorial there are different views. But Kṛṣṇa refers herewith that brahma-sūtra-padaiḥ hetumadbhir viniścitaṁ. Others... There are many other books of knowledge. They are not very reasonable. That is dogmatic. But hetumadbhiḥ, if we accept with our logic and sense, that is first-class book which gives us information of the ātmā, Paramātmā.

Lecture on BG 13.14 -- Bombay, October 7, 1973:

Another meaning of this verse is that if He has got, sarvataḥ pāṇi-pādam, He has got His legs and hands, eyes, head, then how He becomes impersonal, void? Where is this conception comes from Bhagavad-gītā? The rascals say that "God is impersonal, no form." How it is possible, if He has got hands and legs, head and ears, how He has become formless? Tell me. Who is there? How He becomes formless? He is not formless. But the difference is His form is different from our form. Our hands and legs are limited, but He has got His hands and legs... That is not limited, that is unlimited. That is difference. When we say, when there is such thing as formless, formless means He hasn't got a form like us which is limited.

Lecture on BG 13.17 -- Bombay, October 11, 1973:

So that is Kṛṣṇa Consciousness perception. And He is living. Because He... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are accepting that Kṛṣṇa, or Para-brahman, or God, because He is in everywhere, He has no personal feature. That is a poor fund of knowledge. That is not God. Because we are thinking materially. Just like if I take a piece of paper and tear it into small pieces and throw it then the original paper has no existence. This is called Māyāvāda, Māyāvāda, or imperfect knowledge. Because I am thinking that materially, if one thing is broken into pieces and thrown, the original form is lost, no more. It becomes impersonal. No. The Veda says that pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate (Īśo Invocation). You take the full God, full... Even God fully represented in every atom, still, He is pūrṇa. That is... One minus one equal to one. And one plus one equal to one. That is Absolute idea. But we calculate from materialistic point of view. As we with our tiny brain, we think like that.

Lecture on BG 13.20 -- Bombay, October 14, 1973:

These are pañca, five kinds of rasas, śānta, dāsya, sākhya, vātsalya, mādhurya. So you can select any one of them, because there must be varieties. Because we are living entities, everyone, we want to enjoy. Therefore variety is the mother of enjoyment. You cannot make everything impersonal, no. There is varieties. Even in the spiritual world there is varieties. That varieties are reflected in this material world. Therefore here also, we love somebody as friend; we love somebody as wife; we love somebody as father; we love somebody as mother, like that. The same thing is pervertedly reflected. And because it is illusion, therefore you are not satisfied.

If you want real love, real position, then you have to transfer your, these loving propensities in five different kinds of mellows to Kṛṣṇa. Then it will be permanent, and you'll be happy.

Lecture on BG 13.24 -- Bombay, October 23, 1973:

And what is the symptom of such knowledge? Brahma-niṣṭham, firmly fixed up in Brahman. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). To know Brahman means to know not only the impersonal brahma-jyotir, but also Paramātmā and Bhagavān. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate. This is knowledge. So such person who has got sufficient knowledge what is this prakṛti, material world, what is the puruṣa, the living entity who is trying to enjoy this material world, and the paramātma-puruṣa, another puruṣa...

upadraṣṭānumantā ca

bhartā bhoktā maheśvaraḥ

paramātmeti cāpy ukto

dehe 'smin puruṣaḥ paraḥ

(BG 13.23)

Those who have no knowledge, they cannot understand, there are two puruṣas. One is apara, and one is para. Apara-puruṣa is the living entity, who is trying to enjoy this material world. But para-puruṣa is the anumantā, guiding principle or order-giving. There are two puruṣas, not one. One is inferior and other is superior. Superior puruṣa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa Himself. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). That is puruṣa-para. And apara. As there are aparā-prakṛti and parā-prakṛti. This material world is aparā-prakṛti, but there is spiritual world also. That is called parā-prakṛti.

Lecture on BG 16.6 -- Hawaii, February 2, 1975:

So similarly, Kṛṣṇa is present in everyone's heart, localized. This is impersonal expansion. Just like sunshine is impersonal expansion of the sun rays, so similarly, Brahman effulgence is the impersonal expansion of Kṛṣṇa's bodily rays. And the portion by which He is present everywhere, aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham... (Bs. 5.35). He is within this universe. He is within your heart, within my heart. He is within everything. "Everything" means even within the atom, paramāṇu. That is His Paramātmā feature. And the last and ultimate feature is Kṛṣṇa's personal body. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1).